Third-party privacy and relevance is a constant point of contestion in discovery. Exhibit A: this article.
How? It’s compelling OpenAI retain data they have the contractual right and technical ability to retain. Nothing is being made public, other than the order itself. Nothing is even being transferred to the plaintiff’s legal team. (At some point it will be made available. But both sides will fight over what they have access to, with the court mediating. That’s a lot of regard for third parties’ privacy.)
I do want to take this opportunity to encourage people to demand compensation from the NYT, if they do somehow get user data. After all, it's YOUR data. If someone uses it without you expressly agreeing to that use in a EULA, they are effectively engaging in piracy of your intellectual property, and you should be able to get damages. And if a judge approved it? Sue the judge, too. Hell, that's what the world has come to isn't it? The legal system is a big war between corporations and we, the people, are just carried on the wind.
(I am not a lawyer, but whatever the equivalent of a "lawyer" is in the court of public opinion, I think I'm slowly becoming one out of necessity)
You were so close. It’s compelling OpenAI to retain data they also have the right and technical ability to delete. It removes OpenAI’s ability to protect privacy if they wanted to.
