The New York Times has recently taken a firm stand against the AI search engine startup Perplexity, demanding the company cease the use of its content without authorization. In a cease and desist letter reported by The Wall Street Journal, the Times accuses Perplexity of utilizing its well-researched and meticulously crafted journalism in ways that violate copyright laws. This action comes amid the ongoing legal battles between the Times and tech giants like OpenAI and Microsoft, where similar claims of unauthorized use of content for training AI models are being contested.
In the letter, the Times characterizes Perplexity’s use of its content as unjust enrichment, calling attention to the significant effort put into producing quality journalism. The newspaper has clearly established its position, implementing barriers to prevent its content from being crawled by certain AI platforms, including Perplexity, as indicated in its robots.txt file that directs search engine crawlers on permissible URL indexing.
In an effort to defend its practices, Perplexity spokesperson Sara Platnick stated that the startup does not scrape content for training AI models. Instead, she claims the platform focuses on indexing web pages and providing factual information as a service to users seeking answers. Platnick insists that no entity can claim copyright over factual information, arguing that such a principle is crucial in maintaining an open informational ecosystem. According to Platnick, news outlets can report on topics that have been covered by other media as long as they represent factual data, regardless of origin.
Perplexity has committed to address the cease and desist notice by the deadline set by the Times, which is October 30th. The company has emphasized its dedication to transparency, highlighting that they maintain a public page detailing their content policies. Furthermore, following accusations of plagiarism earlier this year, Perplexity took proactive steps, forming partnerships with several publishing entities, including Fortune, Time, and The Texas Tribune, offering them ad revenue and free subscriptions in a bid to foster positive relationships within the industry.
CEO Aravind Srinivas expressed a desire for collaboration, noting that Perplexity has no intention of positioning itself as an adversary to any news organization, including The New York Times. Instead, the company is eager to work alongside publishers to create a cooperative framework for information distribution.
As the conflicts between traditional media and tech companies continue to evolve, this situation emphasizes the growing tensions around content ownership, AI-training practices, and the ethical boundaries of information utilization. The outcome of this dispute will likely set precedents for how startups like Perplexity navigate their relationships with established media organizations amidst a rapidly changing digital landscape. As discussions unfold, all eyes will be on the deadlines and responses from both the New York Times and Perplexity, as well as the broader implications for the future of journalism and AI integration in content dissemination.