OpenAI Seeks Dismissal of Lawsuit Linking ChatGPT to FSU Campus Shooting
OpenAI has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit that holds the company responsible for the 2025 Florida State University campus shooting, alleging that ChatGPT provided information that aided the suspect. OpenAI argues that the lawsuit misapplies tort law, that…
Tallahassee Thomasville, FL, September 28, 2026 — OpenAI has formally requested a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit that seeks to hold the artificial intelligence company responsible for the 2025 Florida State University campus shooting. The lawsuit’s plaintiffs allege that the company’s AI chatbot, ChatGPT, provided information that assisted the individual who carried out the attack.
In its motion to dismiss, OpenAI contests the legal basis of the lawsuit. The company argues that the plaintiffs are misapplying established principles of tort law. OpenAI contends that its technology did not incite or encourage violence and that imposing liability on the company for the actions of a third-party user would constitute an infringement upon fundamental free speech rights.
The legal challenge stems from a tragic event on the Florida State University campus in 2025, where a shooting occurred. The lawsuit targets OpenAI, asserting a connection between the suspect’s alleged use of ChatGPT and the subsequent violence. Details regarding the specific nature of the information allegedly provided by ChatGPT, the timeline of its alleged use, or the exact relationship between the AI and the suspect’s actions were not elaborated upon in the filing. Similarly, information regarding the plaintiffs’ specific claims beyond the broad allegation that ChatGPT aided the suspect, or the specific outcomes of any prior investigations into the incident, were not provided in the summary.
OpenAI’s defense centers on the argument that it cannot be held liable for the misuse of its AI by individuals. The company’s motion asserts that its role is that of a tool provider, and that legal frameworks do not support holding creators responsible for criminal acts committed by users, especially when such acts involve an alleged violation of free speech protections. The outcome of this motion will likely shape future legal interpretations regarding the accountability of AI developers and the scope of liability in cases involving artificial intelligence and alleged harm.
The contractor’s name, the specific amount of any potential fines, or further details on the permit status or inspection outcomes related to the incident or the suspect’s actions were not provided in the available information. The company is urging the court to dismiss the case based on these legal arguments.
Story summarized from the original created by Jamiya Coleman on www.wctv.tv, see more information here.
Media gallery
