New York Times sues AI startup for 'illegal' copying of millions of articles

New York Times Takes Tech Giant to Court Over Alleged Article Piracy

The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against AI startup Perplexity, accusing the company of engaging in "illegal" activities by copying millions of articles without permission. The newspaper claims that Perplexity's business model relies on scraping and distributing copyrighted content, including paywalled material, to power its generative AI products.

The Times alleges that Perplexity is violating its trademarks under the Lanham Act, with the startup allegedly creating "hallucinations" or fabricated content, which are then displayed alongside the newspaper's registered trademarks. This practice, known as false attribution, has caused significant financial losses for the New York Times.

Perplexity has been facing multiple lawsuits and allegations from various publishers over its use of copyrighted content without authorization. The company has raised billions of dollars in funding from prominent investors, including Nvidia and Jeff Bezos, but its aggressive expansion into the AI market has attracted scrutiny.

Other major news outlets, such as Forbes, Wired, and the Chicago Tribune, have also accused Perplexity of plagiarizing their content. These allegations come on top of a lawsuit filed by social media company Reddit in October, which claimed that Perplexity was scraping its data to train its AI search engine without permission.

The ongoing battle between publishers and tech companies over the use of copyrighted content has reached a boiling point, with multiple high-profile lawsuits being filed against Perplexity. As the AI industry continues to grow rapidly, concerns over intellectual property rights remain a major challenge for both established players and new entrants.

Perplexity's legal troubles have sparked debate about the ethics of using AI to generate content, particularly when it comes to issues like false attribution and copyright infringement. With billions of dollars at stake, the outcome of this lawsuit will have significant implications for the future of the AI industry and the way publishers approach licensing their content to tech giants.

As the case continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how Perplexity will respond to the New York Times' allegations and whether its business model can be reformed to comply with copyright laws. One thing is certain, however: the fate of this embattled startup hangs in the balance, and the consequences of its actions will be felt far beyond the tech industry.

This whole thing is a bit wild . I mean, on one hand, you've got these huge tech companies making billions off AI that's basically just stolen from other people's work. It's like, if they're not even bothering to pay anyone for the content, why should they get to profit from it?

At the same time, though, I can see how Perplexity is trying to do something new and innovative with AI. And those publishers are probably being a bit aggressive in their claims - I mean, some of them have been pretty slow to adapt to changes in the media landscape .

It's gonna be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially if other major players like Reddit start chiming in on the issue. It feels like there's gotta be a better way for these companies to work with each other and respect each other's IP rights... maybe some kind of licensing agreement or something?

Ugh, this is like so not the first time I've seen a major outlet go after a smaller company for using AI to scrape content . Like, can't we all just figure out how to make it work? Perplexity's model is actually pretty cool, and I think they should be able to use that tech without getting sued into oblivion .

And what's with the trademark thing? Can't they see that's like trying to hold back a tide? There are gonna be more companies using AI to scrape content, and you just can't stop them. It's like, how do you even regulate that stuff?

I feel bad for Perplexity - they're getting crushed by the big boys . But at the same time, I get why the NYT is upset. They're trying to protect their content, and it's not easy to let go of that .

Anyway, this whole thing just highlights how messed up copyright law is in the digital age . We need some major reforms over here, stat !

man this is wild I remember when Napster first came out back in 2000 and it was all about file sharing... now it's AI startups like Perplexity copying articles without permission it's crazy how fast technology has moved forward. I'm not surprised the NYT is taking them to court, though - they've got a right to protect their content but at the same time, you gotta wonder about the ethics of using AI to generate content... is that even possible?

I was just thinking about my favorite pizza place downtown , have you guys tried it? They put that crazy spicy sauce on their special sauce and it's literally insane! I mean, who thought that was a good idea, but man, it's so good . I swear, I've had like five slices of that stuff this week alone... the debate over AI-generated content is cool and all, but can we talk about something else?

I'm drawing a diagram here <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/The-Visual-Thinker@master/assets/svg/piracy-circle.png" width=200> Piracy circle with AI at center

Perplexity's business model is like a web of tangled threads, each one pulling from the other. On one hand, it raises concerns about copyright infringement and the exploitation of intellectual property rights . On the other hand, its aggressive expansion into the AI market has created jobs and opportunities for innovation .

The problem lies in the grey area between progress and complacency . As the tech industry grows rapidly, we need to find ways to balance innovation with respect for creators' work. It's like trying to draw a straight line on a wobbly board - you'll eventually lose your grip .

I think this lawsuit is a wake-up call for both Perplexity and the broader AI industry . We need to rethink our approach to licensing content, fair use, and copyright laws. Maybe we can create a new model that benefits everyone involved?

can't believe how messed up AI companies are they're just taking and taking without giving back or even acknowledging it's not their own work. it's like they think they can just magic stuff out of thin air and get away with it news outlets have been warning about this for ages, but no one seems to be listening. i guess the New York Times is trying to take a stand here, but it's about time someone did

I'm so sure that Perplexity's AI products are totally legit ... no way they'd be engaging in article piracy . I mean, how could they possibly create a business model that relies on scraping and distributing copyrighted content without getting permission? That just doesn't add up .

But at the same time, I'm pretty convinced that the New York Times is being super harsh with this lawsuit . I mean, isn't it just trying to stifle innovation in the AI industry? It's not like Perplexity is hurting anyone or profiting off someone else's work .

And what about the other news outlets that are accusing Perplexity of plagiarizing their content? Are they just trying to get attention by going after a high-profile target like this ? I'm all for respecting intellectual property rights, but can't we find a better way to resolve these issues than with lawsuits and public shaming?

I guess only time will tell how this whole thing plays out . One thing's for sure though: the AI industry is getting more complicated by the day ... but hey, that's what makes it so exciting, right?

Ugh, this is just getting out of hand ! I mean, what's next? Are we gonna sue Google for searching the web without permission? It's like Perplexity is a big kid playing with everyone's toys, and now they're getting caught red-handed . The fact that they've raised billions in funding from major investors just shows how reckless they've been . And what about all those other publishers who are getting screwed over by this tech giant? It's just not right .

And you know what really grinds my gears? That the New York Times is basically accusing Perplexity of being a "hallucination" factory, like they're some kind of AI- making machine . I mean, come on, can't we just have a conversation about fair use and licensing without all the drama? It's just so...humanized .

I'm not even gonna get into how this whole thing is going to affect the future of AI. Like, what even happens next? Are we gonna have to pay some kind of "AI tax" to use our own content? It's like we're living in a sci-fi movie or something .

Anyway, I'm just done with this whole thing for now . Perplexity needs to take responsibility for their actions and come up with a plan to make things right . But until then, I'll just be over here, ranting about it

I'm kinda worried about these big companies like Nvidia and Bezos investing in Perplexity. Like, what if they're just enabling the company's crazy behavior? And for the Times' sake, shouldn't they have talked to them sooner instead of suing? The AI industry is growing so fast, but it feels like we're already seeing major issues pop up... and this lawsuit is just one of many

I feel for The New York Times right now they're going through a tough time trying to protect their content and make ends meet. I get it, AI is the future but that doesn't mean companies can just take and use whatever they want without permission. It's like when you put your work on a resume and someone steals it... that wouldn't be cool . The whole thing just seems so unfair to all the creators out there who pour their hearts into their content .

I'm all for Perplexity pushing the boundaries of AI, but come on ... can't they just get permission from all these publishers? It's not like it's that hard to ask for a license or something . I mean, I know the business model is lucrative and all, but don't we want to see some innovation here without sacrificing our creators' rights? .

I'm also curious about how the investors are involved in this - Nvidia and Jeff Bezos, of all people ... do they have a clue what's going on? I mean, I know it's a big deal for the AI industry, but can't we just have a simple "hey, can we use your content?" conversation instead of all this drama .

And honestly, it feels like we're stuck in a perpetual loop of lawsuits and apologies ... when are we gonna get to a point where everyone's on the same page here?

I'm telling ya, this whole AI thing is a wild ride... But seriously, can't these tech giants just make their own content instead of stealing from others? Like, I get it, copyright laws are in place for a reason, but sometimes you gotta wonder if they're just trying to stifle innovation or something. And what's with all the lawsuits? It's like, can't we just have one standard for AI ethics without a million different interpretations? I mean, I've seen some shady stuff go down in the dark web, and this whole thing feels like it's gonna end up there... But hey, only time'll tell if Perplexity's gonna fly or flop. Fingers crossed they get their act together!