The Times's copyright suit against OpenAI and Microsoft has reached summary judgment before Judge Sidney Stein, after OpenAI was forced to hand over 20 million ChatGPT logs in discovery.

Framed as an existential threat to AI, the case looks to VICO more like a negotiated exit than a courtroom reckoning.

The model sees the case heading for settlement, at 68%, because both sides have incentives to settle. Settling pushes any landmark ruling off to a later date and a different case.

For the New York Times, the incentive to settle comes in the form of future licensing agreements: VICO gives 82% that the Times signs a licensing deal with a major LLM developer within three years, quite possibly OpenAI itself.

Because a true legal precedent is unlikely, the industry-shaking outcomes stay remote. A forced model retraining or destruction sits at just 6% and a ruling from any court against fair use at 22%.

The model gives just 28% that the Supreme Court rules training on news articles outside fair use in the next decade, keeping the doomsday scenario a tail risk rather than a base case.

That is quietly bullish for AI valuations: investors can treat copyright as a manageable cost of doing business.