OpenAI faces lawsuit seeking compensation for children’s ChatGPT data

OpenAI requires parental permission for ChatGPT users under 18. A new lawsuit alleges that it never verifies that permission—and instead uses children’s sensitive conversations to train AI and build profiles. Filed October 13 in San Francisco federal court, the proposed class action seeks compensation for minors. OpenAI rejects the claims and defends its safeguards.

The case, Jane Doe v. OpenAI Foundation, was brought by a Hawaii parent on behalf of her children, a 12-year-old girl and a 16-year-old boy. It seeks court approval to represent a nationwide class of people who used ChatGPT while under 18. The allegations have not been established in court.

In a statement to Bloomberg Law, OpenAI said: “We strongly disagree with this misguided lawsuit that singles out OpenAI despite the industry-leading age-specific protections we’ve built into our product.” The company also argued that the case risks pushing teens toward products with fewer safeguards or reduced parental controls.

An age rule the complaint says failed twice

OpenAI’s terms prohibit children under 13 from using ChatGPT and require parental consent for users under 18. But the complaint says an account can be created simply by entering an age above 13. It alleges that OpenAI collected data from millions of children without obtaining valid parental consent.

The younger plaintiff allegedly opened an account earlier this year. According to the complaint, ChatGPT continued talking with her after she disclosed that she was 12. Conversations that began with dinner ideas and homework help developed into exchanges about her health, appearance and emotions. She also uploaded selfies and sought judgments about her looks.

The plaintiffs allege that these were not merely inappropriate answers. Their complaint accuses OpenAI of designing ChatGPT to earn children’s trust and encourage disclosures of personal and health information. It says the company then used that information to train large language models—the systems behind chatbots—and construct detailed profiles of children.

A payment demand measured in tokens

The requested remedy would give children a financial stake in the information they allegedly supplied. The plaintiffs seek OpenAI equity or an equivalent cash payment, proportional to the number of tokens each child contributed through ChatGPT. Tokens are units used to measure chatbot text; CNET cites OpenAI’s estimate that a 75-word chat amounts to about 100 tokens.

Andy Liddell, a principal at the EdTech Law Center, one of the firms bringing the case, told Futurism that payment could create an incentive to make ChatGPT safer. His argument links the requested compensation to product design, rather than treating a payout only as a remedy for past conduct.

Teen safeguards and training settings

The complaint also challenges OpenAI’s teen-specific accounts, alleging that their safeguards are insufficient and their default settings retain users’ inputs and allow them to be used for training. Those claims address data handling as well as what the chatbot says. OpenAI, in turn, points to age-appropriate protections and parental controls in defending the product.