According to CNBC, The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against AI startup Perplexity in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint, filed on June 26, 2024, accuses Perplexity of unlawfully scraping The Times’ vast archive of stories, videos, and podcasts to formulate answers for its users. The suit claims Perplexity’s AI generates outputs that are “identical or substantially similar to” the newspaper’s copyrighted content. A Times spokesperson stated the company “firmly object[s] to Perplexity’s unlicensed use of our content to develop and promote their products.” Perplexity did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the lawsuit. You can read the full legal complaint here.
Another Legal Front Opens
So here we go again. The Times is basically reloading the same legal arguments it used against OpenAI and Microsoft, but now it’s aiming at a different kind of target. Perplexity isn’t just a pure chatbot; it’s a search engine that cites its sources and tries to summarize the web. That’s its whole selling point. But according to the Times, that process involves a massive, unauthorized ingestion of their work. It’s a direct shot at the core data-gathering practice of almost every AI company out there.
Why Perplexity Is A Unique Target
Here’s the thing: this lawsuit feels strategically timed. Perplexity has been on a tear lately, raising money at a multi-billion dollar valuation and positioning itself as a Google challenger. Its model depends on having fresh, accurate information—exactly what a news organization produces. The Times likely sees Perplexity not just as a copyright infringer, but as a direct competitor. If an AI can summarize the key facts of a Times investigation, why would anyone click through? That threatens both subscription revenue and advertising. This isn’t just about training data; it’s about the output competing with the original product.
The Broader Battle For Content
Look, the core issue remains unresolved. AI companies argue that training on publicly available data is fair use. Publishers say it’s theft that undermines their business. By suing Perplexity, The Times is widening the battlefield. They’re signaling that no AI company, whether a giant like OpenAI or a hot startup, gets a free pass. The outcome could force a fundamental shift. Will AI firms have to license all their source material? And if so, at what cost? That could cripple startups and entrench the biggest players who can afford the deals. It’s a messy fight with no easy answers, but one thing’s clear: the free-for-all era of AI scraping is officially under legal siege.
