As artificial intelligence-powered search services grow in popularity, concerns about how they interact with original journalism are intensifying. The latest dispute centers on Perplexity AI, a tech startup valued at $18 billion, now facing a new copyright lawsuit from prominent Japanese publishers Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun. The lawsuit, brought before a Tokyo District Court, not only shines a spotlight on AI’s role in the dissemination of news, but also highlights a growing trend of legal battles between digital innovators and traditional media. Several companies have attempted various strategies to coexist with AI, ranging from litigation to revenue-sharing models, yet the tension remains unresolved.
Other recent reports have noted Perplexity’s ongoing legal friction with media groups worldwide, including litigation from Yomiuri Shimbun in Japan and U.S.-based publishers such as Dow Jones and The New York Post. Perplexity’s attempts to address disputes—like entering revenue-sharing agreements with selected outlets—have made news in the past, but legal objections persist. Additionally, international publishers remain divided, with some opting for licensing deals with AI companies and others pursuing their own court actions. This persistent standoff demonstrates the challenges both sides face in securing fair terms.
Why Have Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun Filed Legal Action?
Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun allege that Perplexity AI has been deliberately storing and distributing their articles since at least June 2024, without proper authorization. The publishers claim these practices amount to “free riding” on journalism, and assert that Perplexity has ignored technical safeguards like robots.txt intended to prevent such activity. They are each seeking damages of 2.2 billion yen (approximately $15 million) and an immediate cessation of content reproduction. According to a statement from the plaintiffs,
“The repeated unauthorized use of our articles damages our rights and credibility”
. The case adds to a string of global legal efforts related to the use of news in AI datasets.
How Has Perplexity AI Responded to Copyright Criticism?
Perplexity AI has not publicly commented on the most recent lawsuit from the Japanese publishers. However, in response to earlier accusations, the company introduced a revenue-sharing program that allows publishers to receive a portion of advertising revenue generated from their content. This initiative has led to partnerships with outlets such as Time Magazine, Fortune, and Der Spiegel. Another upcoming measure is the planned Comet Plus news service, which would reportedly provide publishers up to 80% of profits. As CEO Aravind Srinivas has stated previously,
“We are committed to building a sustainable partnership with publishers to support quality journalism.”
Are Other AI Companies Facing Legal Efforts Over News Content?
Several major AI platforms are also involved in disputes over journalism use. The New York Times has initiated legal action against OpenAI and Microsoft, while Canadian startup Cohere is facing lawsuits from multiple news organizations. Some companies, such as the Associated Press and Vox Media, have entered licensing deals with AI developers, while others continue to raise concerns about unauthorized use. These scenarios highlight the divergent strategies news companies are adopting to protect their interests as technology advances.
This ongoing confrontation between legacy media and AI innovators points to a larger debate about copyright, value creation, and sustainable business models for journalism in the digital age. Despite measures like revenue-sharing agreements and partnerships, accusations of content misuse have not abated. As publishers and tech firms search for common ground, recent legal actions show that negotiations remain delicate. For news organizations, careful navigation of licensing, legal challenges, and partnership opportunities is essential to safeguard the original reporting that underpins public trust. Readers, meanwhile, should be aware of how their news is sourced and the implications for journalism’s future viability.
