If I made a contract with OpenAI to keep information confidential, and the newspaper demanded access, via Court discovery or otherwise, then both the Court and OpenAI definitely should be attentive to my rights to intervene and protect the privacy of my confidential information.

Normally Courts are oblivious to advanced opsec, which is one fundamental reason they got breached, badly, a few years ago. I just saw a new local order today on this very topic.[1] Courts are just waking up to security concepts that have been second nature to IT professionals.

From my perspective, the magistrate judge here made two major goofs: (1) ignoring opsec as a reasonable privacy right for customers of an internet service and (2) essentially demanding that several hundred million of them intervene in her court to demand that she respect their ability to protect their privacy.

The fact that the plaintiff is the news organization half the US loves to hate does not help, IMO. Why would that half of the country trust some flimsy "order" to protect their most precious secrets from an organization that lives and breathes cloak-and-dagger leaks and political subterfuge. NYT needed to keep their litigation high and tight and instead they drove it into a ditch with the help of a rather disappointing magistrate.

[1] https://www.uscourts.gov/highly-sensitive-document-procedure...

Local American laws supersede the contract law operating in other countries that OpenAI is doing business in?