There is text input and text output it's really not that complicated
If used in court the jury would be given access to the full conversation just like if it was an email thread
I'm sure that there are many people who thoughtlessly type very personal things into chatgpt including things that might not look so good for them if they came out at trial.
As I understand it, some people treat chatgpt like a close personal friend and therapist. Confiding their deepest secrets and things like that.
Same difference as: "Allowing minors into casinos... is it any different from letting them play cards with their friends at home with their pocket money?"
I take issue with the "is designed to" phrase. That implies an intentionality upon OpenAI (and others) to create something that acts as a therapist or confidant. It is designed to respond to you in a way that you ask it to. The agency for confiding deep secrets to a cloud service is entirely upon the human typing in the text.
If one doesn't try to make it your friend, it doesn't try to act like it.
Presumably what's of evidentiary value is the tokens you type, though.
https://openai.com/index/response-to-nyt-data-demands/ (yes, that's written 100% from OpenAI's perspective)
In particular:
> The New York Times is demanding that we retain even deleted ChatGPT chats and API content that would typically be automatically removed from our systems within 30 days.
> ...
> This data is not automatically shared with The New York Times or anyone else. It’s locked under a separate legal hold, meaning it’s securely stored and can only be accessed under strict legal protocols.
> ...
> Right now, the court order forces us to retain consumer ChatGPT and API content going forward. That said, we are actively challenging the order, and if we are successful, we’ll resume our standard data retention practices.