FOLLOW US

San Francisco, CA - A California federal judge dismissed a lawsuit on Friday brought by consumers alleging privacy violations by Microsoft Corp. and OpenAI LP's products. The judge criticized the complaint as "excessive" and filled with "unnecessary and distracting allegations," making it "nearly impossible" to determine the adequacy of the claims.

U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria granted Microsoft's and OpenAI's motions to dismiss but allowed the consumer plaintiffs, led by Marilyn Cousart, an opportunity to amend their claims. "Because the court has no way of telling whether the plaintiffs could adequately state a claim once all the mud is scraped off the walls of the complaint, dismissal is with leave to amend," Judge Chhabria stated. He warned that if the amended complaint continues to include irrelevant information, it will be dismissed with prejudice.

The judge also expressed doubts about the plaintiffs' ability to represent absent class members adequately and responsibly, given the current state of the complaint. The consumers have three weeks to file an amended complaint and are represented by attorneys from Morgan & Morgan PA and Clarkson Law Firm PC.

The nearly 200-page complaint alleges that Microsoft and OpenAI's AI products use stolen private information from hundreds of millions of internet users. The suit claims that OpenAI used this data to train large language models and algorithms for products like ChatGPT and Dall-E. Microsoft has invested billions of dollars in OpenAI and integrated its AI technology into products like Bing and Microsoft Teams. The complaint also alleges that OpenAI and Microsoft have enough personal information to create "digital clones" of users and can manipulate users' skill sets, leading to "professional obsolescence."

The consumers argued earlier this year that their complaint clearly outlined their claims, but Judge Chhabria disagreed, stating that the complaint is "needlessly long and contains largely irrelevant, distracting or redundant information." He cited examples such as five pages detailing political leaders' reactions to AI advancements and more than three pages on copyright concerns, despite not alleging any copyright claims.

Judge Chhabria also noted that the complaint included "rhetoric and policy grievances that are not suitable for resolution by federal courts," asserting that the plaintiffs need to understand they are in a court of law, not a town hall meeting.

In a separate order, Judge Chhabria denied Microsoft's motion to compel arbitration, again citing the complaint's excessive irrelevant information. He stated that it is unclear whether the arbitration clause in the Microsoft Services Agreement would cover the alleged conduct, but allowed Microsoft to refile its motion once the consumers file an amended complaint.