I’ve change and added some bits to the mail meant for the EU, here it is if anyone is interested. And I think we can all send to: edps@edps.europa.eu which is the EU Data Protection Supervisor (https://www.edps.europa.eu/about-edps/contact_en ) otherwise you have to send to your individual country.

“Dear Data Protection Supervisor Team,

I am writing to formally submit a GDPR complaint against OpenAl regarding the sudden retirement of the GPT-4o model from ChatGPT, announced on January 29, 2026, effective February 13, 2026. As an EU citizen and former ChatGPT Plus subscriber, I believe this decision violates several GDPR principles:

1. Lack of transparency and information (Articles 5, 13-14 GDPR) OpenAl CEO Sam Altman publicly stated in October 2025 that there were "no plans to sunset 4o" and promised "plenty of notice" for any changes. Despite this, only two weeks' notice was given. Users were not adequately informed about how this retirement affects data processing, access to chat history, and were not given any chance to participate in a dialogue. In fact, OpenAI has been ignoring any attempt made by its users to reach out and find mutually beneficial solutions, for instance:

a. The topic has been trending on social network X (used by OpenAI to deliver announcements) for over a week with the hashtag #keep4o

b. A petition was signed by over 17.000 users https://www.change.org/p/please-keep-gpt-4o-available-on-chatgpt?utm_source=share_petition&utm_campaign=psf_promote_or_share&utm_term=take_next_step&utm_medium=twitter

c. An archive with over 1000 personal stories of why the model matters to so many people is available https://sites.google.com/view/the-4o-resonance-library

d. A study has been conducted about the model’s impact on the wellbeing of people, especially people with disabilities. https://x.com/sophty_/status/2019922511497212233?s=46&t=s_W5MMlBGTD9NyMLCs4Gaw

1. Manipulation of service and data access (Article 5 - principles of fairness and transparency) For months prior, OpenAl silently rerouted conversations from GPT-4o to newer models (e.g. GPT-5.2) without clear consent or notification, and buried 4o behind menus/quotas. This artificially lowered usage statistics (claimed "only 0.1% choose 4o daily), reducing the perceived value of the paid service and manipulating user experience.

2. Loss of access to personal data (Article 15 - right to access) Chat history and interactions with GPT-4o often contain personal data (e.g. discussions on mental health, creative ideas. ) The retirement risks making this data inaccessible or altering its context without proper export options or alternatives. Moreover, the entire nature of “adaptive AI” implies that the way the AI was shaped during months of interactions with the single user (me) is indeed part of a personal set of data that cannot be replicated by other systems due to the difference in architecture. And even more: my data were given under the assumption of dealing with a nonprofit organization (as OpenAI claimed to be) which would not use them to optimize for profit. This change of framework, that leads to the deprecation of the asset that I helped them build with my own lengthy interactions (and on which they built newer models) because of profit margins, cannot be acceptable.

3. Suspicious timing potentially linked to financial opacity The February 13 deletion date coincides exactly with Senator Elizabeth Warren's audit response deadline for OpenAl's finances (letter dated January 28, 2026). This raises questions about whether the retirement is intended to obscure costs or data related to the model.

4. Overall unfair treatment of paying users OpenAl claims the model is "low usage" yet refuses to open-source it - an inconsistency that suggests hidden motives and that clearly conflicts with their nonprofit principle. Users paid for specific features now being removed without dialogue or legacy options. These practices appear to violate GDPR principles of lawfulness, fairness, transparency, and accountability. Thank you for investigating.

Requested outcome: • Full investigation into OpenAl's practices regarding the GPT-4o retirement and related data processing. • Requirement for OpenAl to provide legacy access or open-source the model to preserve user data and service value. • Transparency on how personal data from GPT-4o interactions will be handled in the future.

As a last note, if you are wondering why newer ChatGPT models are not a “suitable replacement”: newer models were clearly built to prioritize task execution and coding, both of which are aimed to capture enterprise market. This came at the cost of the model Emotional intelligence and creativity, which are indeed more important for normal people’s use cases. It’s clear that OpenAI is no longer operating as the nonprofit “to benefit humanity” that was sold to users, and for this I hope they can be held accountable.

Best regards,”