Anthropic wants OpenAI to show its work on deleted Reddit posts
A September 21st motion seeks records on Reddit's Compliance API, deletion events and whether content can be removed from models already trained on it.
By Ryan Merket · Published
RUNTIMEWIRE INVESTIGATION — Original analysis
Original reporting by RuntimeWire, based on reverse engineering.
Why it matters
The requests could clarify how Reddit's deletion requirements apply to licensed AI data after it enters training datasets or models. The filing identifies records Anthropic wants; it does not show that OpenAI mishandled deleted posts or can remove content from trained models.
Reporting record
Finding
Anthropic’s motion seeks records about OpenAI’s handling of Reddit deletion events, but the inspected filings do not establish that OpenAI failed to delete content or what its models can retain or reproduce.
How we verified
Methods: reverse engineering.
Reddit v. Anthropic: verified reporting leads Checked October 4, 2026 San Francisco Superior Court, CGC-25-625892 Lead worth pursuing Anthropic asks court to make OpenAI disclose how it handles deleted Reddit posts. The September 21 motion to compel targets OpenAI OpCo, LLC. Anthropic seeks further responses and production on 25 of the 34 requests in its June 16 subpoena. The hearing is listed for November 12, 2026, at 9 a.m., Department 302. The motion asks for production following a protective order and also requests sanctions against OpenAI. These are requested remedies; no ruling granting them appears in the docket inspected on October 4. The most useful requests for the privacy story are Nos. 28-32: 28: Records of OpenAI's implementation of Reddit's Compliance API, including operational documentation and deletion-event logs or summaries. 29: Evidence of deletion or suppression across systems, datasets, products, and customer-facing outputs following Reddit deletion events. 30: Records of failures, outages, delays, backlogs, and technical limitations. 31: Records of third-party complaints or demands concerning failures to delete Reddit content. 32: Records addressing whether Reddit content can be removed or suppressed from models that have already been trained. Why this matters: Anthropic argues that Reddit's privacy and interference claims depend on whether the guardrails imposed on licensed AI companies actually operate as Reddit describes. The requests would test that claim against the conduct and capabilities of Reddit's named licensee, OpenAI. This is a reporting interpretation of Anthropic's stated defense, not a finding that OpenAI has violated a deletion requirement. Primary locations: - Motion, PDF pages 13-14 (printed pages 12-13), and page 17 (printed page 16). - Purcell declaration, Exhibit 1, PDF pages 14-15 (attachment pages 5-6). - Separate statement, PDF pages 69-85 (printed pages 68-84), for the individual requests, objections and Anthropic's arguments concerning requests 28-32. The subpoena standoff Anthropic alleges that OpenAI has produced no documents and has not investigated the actual burden of responding. Purcell's declaration records Anthropic's account of an August 5 telephone conference; that account is not a transcript or OpenAI's own admission in a public statement. OpenAI's position is available in actual letters attached to the declaration: - September 9: OpenAI says material available from Reddit should be sought from the party first. For other material it wants a narrower scope and specific factual justifications. It says it remains open to reasonable production. PDF pages 60-61, Exhibit 7. - September 14: OpenAI says Anthropic has not answered those questions and declines to agree to additional time on that basis. PDF page 66, Exhibit 9. - September 18: OpenAI says Anthropic merely postponed some requests and did not narrow the remaining ones; it again declines an extension and says it will respond appropriately to a motion. PDF page 74, Exhibit 11. The July 22 objections invoke relevance, burden, time scope, confidentiality, trade secrets, and, for certain requests, privilege or the availability of documents from Reddit. They are reproduced in Exhibit 4 and in the separate statement. The absence of a protective order was discussed by both sides. Anthropic's September 16 letter postpones requests 3-6, 8, 18 and 24-26, leaving 25 requests pursued in the motion. It asks to extend its deadline to move to compel until December 9. PDF pages 68-72, Exhibit 10. Additional angles within the same filing 1. Pre-license Reddit access: Requests 9-12 seek OpenAI's records of use before its first Reddit license, third-party datasets such as Pushshift or Common Crawl, authorization analyses, and the volume involved. Anthropic wants to test Reddit's account of licensed and unlicensed commercial use. These requests do not establish previously unknown unauthorized use by OpenAI. Original subpoena: declaration PDF page 13, attachment page 4. 2. Reddit data's economic value: Requests 1, 2, 7 and 13-17, 19-23, 27 seek internal valuations, alternative data sources, model use, benchmarks, revenue or engagement effects, and substitution costs. They could test Reddit's alleged licensing losses and illuminate what the data contributes to AI products. The subpoena does not disclose a new license price. Original subpoena: declaration PDF pages 12-14, attachment pages 3-5. 3. OpenAI's view of Claude: Requests 33-34 seek nonprivileged assessments of Anthropic/Claude and records of effects on OpenAI's business, products or licensing decisions. Anthropic argues these would test Reddit's asserted competitive injury. No such internal assessment is disclosed by the filing. Original subpoena: declaration PDF page 15, attachment page 6. Latest case status from the live register of actions The three October 1 entries state that the following matters were taken off calendar and are to be decided by a discovery referee: - Anthropic's motion to compel Reddit's document production, Set One. - Reddit's motion to compel Anthropic's interrogatory and document responses. - Reddit's protective-order and electronic discovery protocol motion. These entries name visiting Judge Harold E. Kahn and say the proceedings were reported. They do not identify the referee or supply the transcript. The OpenAI motion is separately listed for November 12. Do not infer from these entries that the OpenAI motion was also referred. The September 18 docket entry records that the breach-of-contract, interference-with-contract and unfair-competition claims survived the demurrer; unjust enrichment and trespass to chattels were sustained with leave to amend. The September 17 entry continued the case-management conference to December 2, 2026, at 10:30 a.m., Department 610. Novelty check and follow-up RuntimeWire's live Reddit search, checked October 4, returns previous stories about Claude trade-secret protections and the postponed discovery hearing; it does not show a published story about these OpenAI deletion requests. The search covers headlines and summaries rather than every article's full text. A public r/redditstock post dated September 30 had already flagged the OpenAI motion and the valuation angle. Broad and targeted news searches found that post and unrelated cases, but no independent news story on the specific model-removal requests. This check does not establish exclusivity. The distinct reporting opportunity is to obtain company responses explaining how Reddit's deletion obligations apply to already-trained models, what the Compliance API changes operationally, and whether OpenAI has now agreed to produce documents. The October 1 transcript could establish the referee's identity and the scope of the referral. No outreach or publication was performed in assembling this packet. Source files 2026-09-21-anthropic-motion-to-compel-openai-10440979.pdf Court document 10440979; 19 PDF pages. 2026-09-21-anthropic-separate-statement-10440981.pdf Court document 10440981; 95 PDF pages. 2026-09-21-purcell-declaration-exhibits-10440982.pdf Court document 10440982; 74 PDF pages; original subpoena and correspondence. 2026-10-01-docket-discovery-referee.png Screenshot of the six October 1 entries, captured October 4 from the official case register. Three entries describe the referral; three are mini-minute entries. The PDFs are unchanged downloads of publicly viewable court filings. Extracted .txt versions are included for search convenience; verify quotations and page references against the PDFs. PDF page numbers above count the cover. Ephemeral court-session links are omitted. Evidence-manifest.json records file sizes and SHA-256 hashes for the packet's contents. { "case": "CGC-25-625892", "court": "San Francisco Superior Court", "checked_date": "2026-10-04", "sources": "Official publicly viewable court register and filed PDFs", "files": [ { "name": "2026-09-21-anthropic-motion-to-compel-openai-10440979.pdf", "size_bytes": 498402, "sha256": "3e5252340d95ffd597aafd1d88db5dabddc072dd4d523d3eacc16281f9ffc3ce" }, { "name": "2026-09-21-anthropic-motion-to-compel-openai-10440979.txt", "size_bytes": 51555, "sha256": "a69d09c188356d59a2e8d173ebaa797d741adb5e7d8d346dd1e3e8d8fc274af7" }, { "name": "2026-09-21-anthropic-separate-statement-10440981.pdf", "size_bytes": 650186, "sha256": "739f6b1dd888c8e815e2d06c87aa8c6b8479b9882b78d8277fadf7ef860ff74b" }, { "name": "2026-09-21-anthropic-separate-statement-10440981.txt", "size_bytes": 272907, "sha256": "b50acb9aebe6e72223c7e9888a87551a9f7565c6464cb7fc3a39767baa0d0753" }, { "name": "2026-09-21-purcell-declaration-exhibits-10440982.pdf", "size_bytes": 4020317, "sha256": "d8290147a89b174ff421d67c56876a71ceae0d8a3994ffeb9b68296724098132" }, { "name": "2026-09-21-purcell-declaration-exhibits-10440982.txt", "size_bytes": 161861, "sha256": "a3d40efd5bdc35ac0b18d5aba4f6ba1d406de609585178d2add768647efdc669" }, { "name": "2026-10-01-docket-discovery-referee.png", "size_bytes": 155127, "sha256": "0b891f5e6cb51d1ca3e5187d40e0bbb40260e91ad7eef5775dc32122bdffed29" }, { "name": "RuntimeWire-reporting-notes.txt", "size_bytes": 7887, "sha256": "e69e17f4f9789317f553c8c3fc154949a878553294f4603f76c3ba11f79ec998" } ] }
Reviewed the motion, declaration exhibits, separate statement and live register of actions, including OpenAI’s letters attached to Anthropic’s filing, to identify the requested records, parties’ stated positions and case status.
Reproduction
Reproduction does not apply to this reporting (document-driven).
Company response
The company was not contacted before publication.
Anthropic is asking a San Francisco judge to require OpenAI to produce records showing how it handles Reddit content after users delete it, including whether that material can be removed or suppressed from models that have already been trained. The September 21st motion targets OpenAI OpCo, LLC, a nonparty in Reddit's lawsuit against Anthropic, and seeks further responses to 25 of 34 document requests served in June.
The requests could test how Reddit's deletion requirements apply after a post moves from Reddit's servers into a licensee's datasets, products or model-training process. They seek evidence relevant to Reddit's claims about deletion safeguards, but do not establish that OpenAI failed to delete material or that Reddit's system failed.
Five requests, numbered 28 through 32, focus on deletion. Anthropic seeks records about OpenAI's implementation of Reddit's Compliance API, deletion-event logs or summaries, and evidence of deletion or suppression across systems, datasets and customer-facing products. It also seeks records concerning outages, delays, backlogs, complaints about failures to delete, and the possibility of removing or suppressing Reddit content from already-trained models.
The request covers several distinct technical operations. Removing a post from an application or database is different from removing it from a training dataset; suppressing an answer in a product is different from changing model weights. The motion asks for records about those processes and capabilities. It does not disclose OpenAI's internal deletion logs or establish what its models can retain or reproduce.
Reddit's public materials set out deletion rules for developers. Its Developer Terms say developers must remove or modify user content and related app content after a deletion or written request. A separate Developer Data Protection Addendum says covered Reddit personal data, including derivatives, must be deleted within 10 days of a request, subject to legal requirements. Reddit's developer guidelines describe delete-event triggers for developer apps.
Those published rules provide context, not proof of the terms governing OpenAI's separate commercial license or evidence of its compliance. Reddit's lawsuit describes a Compliance API that automatically notifies licensees when users delete posts or comments. OpenAI and Reddit announced their partnership in May 2024, saying OpenAI would access Reddit's Data API and bring Reddit content into ChatGPT and other products. The motion seeks records that could show how deletion signals operate in that licensed relationship.
The discovery fight is contested. Anthropic says OpenAI produced no documents and did not adequately investigate the burden of responding. OpenAI's letters, attached to Anthropic's filing, take the position that Anthropic should seek material available from Reddit directly and narrow other requests with specific factual justifications. In September correspondence, OpenAI said it remained open to reasonable production; it later declined Anthropic's request for additional time and said it would respond to a motion. Those accounts come from the parties' filings and correspondence, not a court finding.
Anthropic asks the court to order production subject to a protective order and also requests sanctions. As of October 4th, the docket showed no ruling granting those requests. The motion is listed for a hearing on November 12th at 9 a.m. in Department 302. A separate October 1st docket update referred other discovery disputes between Reddit and Anthropic to a discovery referee; the OpenAI motion remains separately listed for November 12th.
The wider subpoena also seeks records about OpenAI's Reddit-data use before its first license, the value of Reddit content to its products and models, and OpenAI's nonprivileged assessments of Claude. Those requests could bear on Reddit's claims of licensing losses and competitive harm. They do not establish unauthorized pre-license use, disclose a new license price or reveal OpenAI's internal view of Claude.