The New York Times Sues Perplexity AI for Copyright Infringement
In a significant legal move, The New York Times has initiated a lawsuit against AI search startup Perplexity, alleging copyright infringement. This marks the second instance where the esteemed publication has taken legal action against an artificial intelligence company, underscoring the growing tension between traditional media outlets and emerging AI technologies.
The lawsuit contends that Perplexity offers commercial products that serve as direct substitutes for The Times’ content, doing so without obtaining permission or providing compensation. This legal action is part of a broader strategy by publishers to ensure that AI companies formally license content, thereby compensating creators and preserving the economic viability of original journalism.
In response to mounting concerns from publishers, Perplexity introduced a Publishers’ Program last year. This initiative offers participating outlets, such as Gannett, TIME, Fortune, and the Los Angeles Times, a share of advertising revenue. Additionally, in August, Perplexity launched Comet Plus, allocating 80% of its $5 monthly fee to participating publishers. The company also secured a multi-year licensing agreement with Getty Images.
Despite these efforts, The New York Times remains steadfast in its position. Graham James, a spokesperson for The Times, stated, While we believe in the ethical and responsible use and development of AI, we firmly object to Perplexity’s unlicensed use of our content to develop and promote their products. We will continue to work to hold companies accountable that refuse to recognize the value of our work.
The lawsuit highlights concerns over Perplexity’s use of retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) technology. This method involves gathering information from various websites and databases to generate responses through products like chatbots and the Comet browser AI assistant. The suit alleges that Perplexity repackages original content in its responses, often producing verbatim or near-verbatim reproductions, summaries, or abridgments of The Times’s copyrighted works.
This legal action follows a cease and desist letter sent by The New York Times to Perplexity in October 2024, demanding that the startup stop accessing and using its content in AI-generated summaries and other outputs. The letter argued that Perplexity had been unjustly enriched by utilizing the publisher’s meticulously crafted journalism without a license, thereby violating copyright laws.
Perplexity’s CEO, Aravind Srinivas, has previously addressed concerns regarding content usage. In an onstage interview at TechCrunch’s Disrupt 2024 conference, Srinivas emphasized that Perplexity always cites its sources and does not claim ownership of any content. He described the company’s approach as surfacing content from the web, summarizing it for user digestibility, and providing information in a manner akin to journalistic or academic practices.
The New York Times is not alone in its legal pursuits against Perplexity. The Chicago Tribune recently filed a lawsuit alleging copyright infringement, claiming that Perplexity delivers Tribune content verbatim. The Tribune’s legal team also raised concerns about Perplexity’s use of RAG technology, suggesting it contributes to the alleged infringement.
This lawsuit is part of a broader trend where media organizations are taking a stand against AI companies that utilize their content without authorization. In October 2024, News Corp’s Dow Jones and the New York Post sued Perplexity, describing the company’s actions as a content kleptocracy. The lawsuit alleged that Perplexity engaged in copyright violations on a grand scale by duplicating and misrepresenting original content.
The New York Times has also pursued legal action against other AI firms. In December 2023, the publication sued OpenAI and its collaborator Microsoft for allegedly violating copyright law by training generative AI models on The Times’ content without consent. The lawsuit called for the destruction of models and training data containing the offending material and sought billions of dollars in damages.
Despite these legal battles, The New York Times has shown a willingness to collaborate with AI companies under appropriate terms. In May 2025, the publication agreed to license its editorial content to Amazon to train the tech giant’s AI platforms. This agreement aimed to bring Times editorial content to various Amazon customer experiences, including news articles, material from NYT Cooking, and The Athletic.
The outcome of The New York Times’ lawsuit against Perplexity could have significant implications for the relationship between media organizations and AI companies. As AI technologies continue to evolve and integrate into various sectors, establishing clear guidelines and agreements regarding content usage and compensation will be crucial to maintaining the integrity and sustainability of original journalism.
