Brian Hood, the newly elected mayor of Hepburn Shire in Australia, has threatened to sue OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT. This automated text service generates responses based on user text prompts over false claims about him. The allegations stated that Hood had gone to prison for bribery in a foreign bribery scandal involving a subsidiary of the Reserve Bank of Australia in the early 2000s. Lawyers representing Hood claim these claims are false and have given OpenAI 28 days to rectify the issue or potentially face a defamation lawsuit.
Hood previously worked for Note Printing Australia, a Reserve Bank of Australia subsidiary. However, he was never charged with any crime related to the bribery scandal and instead notified the authorities about payments made to foreign officials to win currency printing contracts. Hood became concerned about the impact of the false allegations on his reputation when members of the public brought the matter to his attention.
If Hood does sue OpenAI, it would be the first defamation lawsuit against the owner of ChatGPT for claims made by the automated text service, which has become popular since its launch last year. Microsoft recently integrated ChatGPT into its search engine Bing. Defamation payouts in Australia are generally capped at around AUD 400,000 ($269,360). Still, Hood may seek more than AUD 200,000 if he can prove that many people accessed false information about him.
James Naughton, a partner at Hood’s law firm, Gordon Legal, said the lawsuit could be a landmark moment in applying defamation law to a new area of artificial intelligence and publication in the IT space. Naughton added that Hood’s reputation is central to his role as an elected official and that he relied on a public record of shining a light on corporate misconduct. Therefore, it makes a difference to him if people in his community access false information about him.
Don’t wait – submit your resume to LawCrossing now and get a jump-start on your legal career!
Naughton also stated that the lawsuit would accuse ChatGPT of giving users a false sense of accuracy by failing to include footnotes, making it difficult for users to verify the source of information generated by the algorithm. “It’s very difficult for somebody to look behind that to say, ‘How does the algorithm come up with that answer?'” said Naughton. “It’s very opaque.”
OpenAI, based in San Francisco, has not yet responded to Hood’s legal letter. If the lawsuit goes ahead, it could be a significant legal challenge for OpenAI and set a precedent for future defamation cases involving automated text services. The case highlights the need for developers of automated text services to ensure that their algorithms are accurate and do not generate false information that could damage people’s reputations.