Editing Openai/69110721-f258-8001-9e77-11494b128269 (section)

=== Assistant: Here are three primary sources yes, I dragged myself into the archives that show what Suchir Balaji claimed and how he … ===
Here are three primary sources (yes, I dragged myself into the archives) that show what Suchir Balaji claimed and how he became involved in legal matters concerning OpenAI. Use with caution; they still don’t prove everything (especially the “illegal profits” angle).
# His blog essay: - “When does generative AI qualify for fair use?” by Balaji on his personal website. He argues that training generative AI on copyrighted material (without licensing) may not qualify as fair use. Business Insider<ref>{{cite web|title=Business Insider|url=https://suchir.net/fair_use.html|publisher=Business Insider|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref> - Key excerpt: “While generative models rarely produce outputs that are substantially similar to any of their training inputs, the process of training a generative model involves making copies of copyrighted data … If these copies are unauthorized, this could potentially be considered copyright infringement …” Business Insider<ref>{{cite web|title=Business Insider|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/suchir-balaji-named-openai-copyright-court-case-ai-training-2024-12|publisher=Business Insider|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref> - He also raises the market-harm side: training on creators’ data then competing with those creators. suchir.net<ref>{{cite web|title=suchir.net|url=https://suchir.net/fair_use.html|publisher=suchir.net|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref>
# His interview / public statements: - In an interview with The New York Times (via article) he said: “If you believe what I believe, you have to just leave the company.” www.ndtv.com<ref>{{cite web|title=www.ndtv.com|url=https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/suchir-balaji-openai-sam-altman-whistleblower-suchir-balaji-found-dead-what-he-said-about-openai-7245051|publisher=ndtv.com|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref> - He told the AP: “It doesn’t feel right to be training on people’s data and then competing with them in the marketplace. I don’t think you should be able to do that. I don’t think you are able to do that legally.” fipa.bc.ca<ref>{{cite web|title=fipa.bc.ca|url=https://fipa.bc.ca/ex-openai-engineer-who-raised-legal-concerns-about-the-technology-he-helped-build-has-died/|publisher=fipa.bc.ca|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref>
# His involvement in legal filings: - A court filing in the NYT lawsuit named Balaji as someone who might have “unique and relevant documents” supporting allegations of willful copyright infringement by OpenAI. Business Insider<ref>{{cite web|title=Business Insider|url=https://www.businessinsider.com/suchir-balaji-named-openai-copyright-court-case-ai-training-2024-12|publisher=Business Insider|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref> - He left OpenAI in August (2023) according to sources, citing concerns about the practices. fipa.bc.ca<ref>{{cite web|title=fipa.bc.ca|url=https://fipa.bc.ca/ex-openai-engineer-who-raised-legal-concerns-about-the-technology-he-helped-build-has-died/|publisher=fipa.bc.ca|access-date=2025-11-10}}</ref>

Important caveats (because I like precision):
* None of these sources show him explicitly alleging “illegal profits” (in legal/financial-crime terms) by OpenAI while claiming it acted as a nonprofit.
* None show detailed claims (publicly) about open-source policy being violated in the sense that “we said we’d open source this data, but we secretly didn’t.” His focus was more on copyright/data-license fairness.
* His arguments are technical/ethical rather than criminal-legal at present (based on public record).
* The legal filings don’t mean the allegations have been proven in court; they just mean he was named as a person with relevant documents.

If you like, I can pull PDFs of the actual court filings (or where they’re available) so you can read what was requested (and what was withheld).