- Microsoft seeks dismissal of lawsuit alleging Azure exclusivity inflated ChatGPT subscription pricing
- Judge questions arbitration claims tied to OpenAI agreements and Microsoft legal arguments
- Subscribers argue compute supply restrictions limited output and increased service costs
A group of ChatGPT Plus subscribers is facing pushback in court after Microsoft asked a federal judge to dismiss their antitrust lawsuit, arguing the claims depend on speculation rather than direct proof of harm.
The case ( a PDF of the complaint can be downloaded here) focuses on allegations that cooperation between Microsoft and OpenAI led to higher prices and weaker service quality.
Microsoft told the court the lawsuit should be dismissed because subscribers bought services from OpenAI, not from Microsoft itself. This separation, it argued, means the plaintiffs cannot show the kind of direct injury required under antitrust law.
In arbitration not federal court
If the judge decides the case should continue, Microsoft said the dispute belongs in arbitration rather than federal court. Its outside counsel Julia Chapman argued that users accepted arbitration terms when signing up for ChatGPT, and those same terms should extend to claims tied closely to the service.
“Equitable estoppel exists to prevent the plaintiffs from doing just that,” Chapman said.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys disagreed, arguing that subscribers never agreed to resolve disputes with Microsoft through arbitration.
Their attorney Briane Dunne told the court that extending arbitration protections to a company outside the original agreement goes beyond what the doctrine allows.
Judge P. Casey Pitts raised doubts about the arbitration argument during the hearing. He indicated there could be connections between the agreements but questioned whether OpenAI’s terms should control claims brought against Microsoft.
“There may be some ‘overlap,’” Pitts said, “but it’s unclear to me why I’m going to have to think about the agreement with OpenAI.”
The dispute centers on claims that Microsoft required OpenAI to rely exclusively on its Azure systems to supply the computing resources needed to run ChatGPT.
Plaintiffs argue that relying on a single supplier limited output and contributed to higher costs and slower service improvements.
Microsoft rejected those claims, saying subscription prices are set by OpenAI alone and not by Microsoft.
Its legal team also argued that the alleged agreement concerns cloud infrastructure services, while the plaintiffs claim harm in the consumer AI market, creating a gap that could weaken the antitrust case.
“This is not a horizontal per se illegal agreement,” Cohen said. “That is crystal clear from the law.”
Judge Pitts did not signal how he plans to rule, leaving both dismissal and arbitration requests unresolved for now.
Via MLex
