The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against AI search startup Perplexity, accusing the company of copyright infringement. This is the second lawsuit filed by The Times against an AI company, with the first being against OpenAI and its backer Microsoft. The lawsuit claims that Perplexity’s method of gathering information from websites and databases to generate responses via its retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) products, such as chatbots and the Comet browser AI assistant, constitutes copyright infringement. The Times argues that Perplexity repackages original content in written responses to users, often verbatim or near-verbatim reproductions, summaries, or abridgments of the original content, including The Times’s copyrighted works.
The lawsuit is part of a larger strategy by publishers to use lawsuits as leverage in negotiations with AI companies. Recognizing that the AI tide cannot be stopped, publishers aim to force AI companies to formally license content in ways that compensate creators and maintain the economic viability of original journalism. Several media outlets, including the Chicago Tribune, have also filed lawsuits against Perplexity, alleging similar copyright infringement claims. Perplexity has attempted to address compensation demands by launching a Publishers’ Program, which offers participating outlets a share of ad revenue, and has also launched Comet Plus, allocating 80% of its monthly fee to participating publishers.
However, The Times takes issue with Perplexity’s method of answering user queries, claiming that it allows the company to “crawl the internet and steal content from behind our paywall and deliver it to its customers in real time.” The Times also claims that Perplexity’s search engine has hallucinated information and falsely attributed it to the outlet, damaging its brand. Perplexity’s head of communications, Jesse Dwyer, has dismissed the lawsuit, stating that publishers have been suing new tech companies for a hundred years, and it has never worked.
The lawsuit comes after The Times sent a cease and desist letter to Perplexity demanding it stop using its content for summaries and other output. The outlet claims it has contacted Perplexity several times over the past 18 months to stop using its content unless an agreement could be negotiated. This isn’t the first fight The Times has picked with an AI firm, as it is also suing OpenAI and its backer Microsoft, claiming the two trained their AI systems with millions of the outlet’s articles without offering compensation.
The mounting legal pressure on Perplexity is not limited to The Times, as other outlets, including News Corp, Encyclopedia Britannica, and Merriam-Webster, have made similar claims against the company. The lawsuit adds to the ongoing debate about the use of AI and its impact on traditional media outlets. While some AI companies have argued that their use of publicly available data for AI training constitutes “fair use,” others have been forced to negotiate licensing deals with publishers to use their content.
The Times is clearly not above working with AI firms that compensate for its reporters’ work, having struck a multi-year deal with Amazon to license its content to train the tech giant’s AI models. Several other publishers and media companies have signed licensing deals with AI firms to use their content for training and to feature in chatbot responses. OpenAI has inked deals with Associated Press, Axel Springer, Vox Media, The Atlantic, and more.
The outcome of the lawsuit is uncertain, but it highlights the need for AI companies to negotiate licensing deals with publishers to use their content. The use of AI is becoming increasingly prevalent, and traditional media outlets are fighting to maintain their economic viability in a rapidly changing landscape. As the lawsuit against Perplexity demonstrates, publishers are willing to take a stand to protect their content and ensure that they are fairly compensated for their work. The future of AI and its impact on traditional media outlets will be shaped by the outcome of this lawsuit and others like it.
In the end, the lawsuit against Perplexity is a sign of the times, as traditional media outlets struggle to adapt to the rapidly changing landscape of AI and technology. The use of AI is becoming increasingly prevalent, and publishers are fighting to maintain their economic viability in a world where content is increasingly being generated and disseminated by machines. The outcome of the lawsuit will have significant implications for the future of AI and its impact on traditional media outlets, and will likely set a precedent for how AI companies interact with publishers and content creators.
As the media landscape continues to evolve, it is clear that the use of AI will play a major role in shaping the future of content creation and dissemination. The lawsuit against Perplexity is just one example of the ongoing struggle between traditional media outlets and AI companies, and highlights the need for greater cooperation and understanding between these two groups. Ultimately, the key to success will be finding a balance between the use of AI and the protection of intellectual property rights, and ensuring that content creators are fairly compensated for their work.
The rise of AI has the potential to revolutionize the way we consume and interact with content, but it also raises important questions about the ownership and control of intellectual property. As the lawsuit against Perplexity demonstrates, these are complex and contentious issues, and will likely be the subject of ongoing debate and litigation in the years to come. However, by working together and finding common ground, it is possible to create a future where AI and traditional media outlets can coexist and thrive, and where content creators are able to reap the benefits of their hard work and creativity.
The New York Times’ lawsuit against Perplexity is a significant development in the ongoing saga of AI and traditional media outlets, and highlights the need for greater cooperation and understanding between these two groups. As the use of AI continues to grow and evolve, it is likely that we will see more lawsuits and controversies like this one, and it will be important for companies and content creators to work together to find solutions that benefit everyone involved. By doing so, we can create a future where AI and traditional media outlets can coexist and thrive, and where content creators are able to reap the benefits of their hard work and creativity.
No Comments