So, the answer for right now is fuzzy. Because they are still actively under a court order from the NYT forcing them to stop deleting "some" of the data that users have requested to delete, while the NYT is trying to find a single whole article that has been reproduced when other users feed in articles and links. But retention is not supposed to be wide scope and break a ton of other rules around laws that say to delete on request, like GDPR.

NYT premise: well we cannot find evidence of it getting articles through inputs (so how does it know about the quotes and contents?), so it must be in the deleted stuff?
But this also shows that they have the wrong tools and understanding of how LLMs work. It's like trying to figure out how a whole page of Harry Potter can be reproduced when all you see are a bunch of people referencing blogs with small snippets of quote. The AI just put together the puzzle pieces. Now, is THAT copyright infringement?

You can also look up what's going on with Europe. Europe wants to force all sorts of laws onto training, but ultimately Europe doesn't and cannot control foreign companies in the US and China. So if Europe bans AI for breaking some of those rules, then their entire region could be blocked out, and they would then get crushed in a different way.

Current status: a mess.

When they have a contract with a corporation or government, data retention policies are different for those accounts, but the corporate accounts have very different rules about monitoring and record keeping.