New York Times Sues Perplexity for Copyright Infringement
The New York Times has initiated legal action against the AI search startup Perplexity for copyright infringement. This lawsuit marks the second instance of The Times targeting an AI company.
Details of the Lawsuit Against Perplexity
The lawsuit was filed in a week where various media organizations, including the Chicago Tribune, have also started legal proceedings against Perplexity. The main accusation from The Times claims that Perplexity creates commercial products that serve as substitutes for its own content without proper permission or compensation.
This legal action occurs amidst ongoing negotiations between publishers and AI firms. Publishers are striving to ensure that AI companies license content properly, preserving the economic viability of original journalism.
Perplexity’s Response and Previous Efforts
In response to compensation demands, Perplexity launched a Publishers’ Program last year. This program offers media outlets like Gannett and the Los Angeles Times a share of advertising revenue. Additionally, in August, Perplexity introduced Comet Plus, dedicating 80% of its subscription fees to participating publishers.
According to Graham James, spokesperson for The Times, the outlet fervently opposes Perplexity’s unlicensed use of its content. He emphasized the importance of holding companies accountable for failing to recognize the value of original journalism.
Concerns over Content Repurposing
The lawsuit criticizes Perplexity’s retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) products, which include chatbots that generate answers by aggregating data from various websites. The complaint asserts that Perplexity often reproduces The Times’s copyrighted material either verbatim or in altered forms.
James pointed out that RAG technology allows Perplexity to gather content from behind paywalls and deliver it to users, which should be restricted to paying subscribers. The Times also alleges that Perplexity’s search engine has spread false information attributed to the outlet, damaging its brand reputation.
Legal Precedents and Industry Reaction
The Times’s lawsuit is part of a broader trend where publishers have consistently challenged tech companies about copyright issues, dating back over a century. Jesse Dwyer, Perplexity’s head of communications, responded, noting historical failures of such lawsuits and suggesting that publishers have often adapted rather than succeeded through litigation.
This legal confrontation follows a cease and desist letter issued by The Times over a year ago, urging Perplexity to halt its unauthorized use of its content. The outlet has reportedly tried to negotiate with Perplexity for the past 18 months without success.
Additional Legal Pressures on Perplexity
The New York Times is not alone in its efforts against Perplexity. Last year, News Corp, which owns various prominent publications, also filed similar complaints. In 2025, further claims were made by other institutions, including Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster.
Various content creators, from Wired to Forbes, have accused Perplexity of unethical practices regarding content scraping from sites that explicitly oppose such actions.
Seeking Compensation and Protection
In its lawsuit, The Times seeks compensation for damages and aims to prevent Perplexity from continuing its current practices. Despite the ongoing legal actions, The Times has shown willingness to collaborate with AI firms that offer fair licensing agreements. Earlier this year, it entered a multi-year licensing deal with Amazon.
The evolving landscape of AI and media interactions continues to spark debates over copyright issues, highlighting the need for clearly defined roles and responsibilities in the digital age.
