New York Times sues Perplexity AI for copying millions of articles, the startup’s response could change everything

The New York Times filed a landmark lawsuit against Perplexity AI on Friday, accusing the artificial intelligence startup of systematically copying and distributing millions of copyrighted articles without permission. The lawsuit, filed in federal court, joins more than 40 other legal disputes between publishers and AI companies. The Times seeks damages, injunctions, and other remedies to halt Perplexity’s alleged unauthorized use of its journalism.

The Core Allegation: Verbatim Content Reproduction

The Times claims that Perplexity’s search engine systematically retrieves millions of copyrighted articles and reproduces them either verbatim or in substantially similar form to users. According to the lawsuit filing, the startup’s AI-First Search API generates complete article copies from Times journalism in response to user search queries. In specific examples cited in court documents, Perplexity’s platform produced full verbatim reproductions of entire Times articles without authorization or compensation.

The lawsuit alleges this practice violates copyright law at multiple levels, both during the training phase of its AI models and in real-time delivery to users. The Times argues Perplexity crawled, scraped, and stored its content without permission. Unlike other AI companies that license content from publishers, Perplexity allegedly built its business model on unauthorized access to protected journalism.

How Perplexity’s Technology Creates the Infringement

Perplexity operates using Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) technology, which searches the web for information to answer user questions. The Times contends this system identifies Times articles through web scraping and retrieves them to generate responses. The startup never obtained licenses or permissions from the Times before deploying this technology at scale.

The search API functionality explicitly allows users to request full article text from sources, and Perplexity delivers complete reproductions—often without meaningful attribution to the original publisher. This differs fundamentally from traditional search engines that provide snippets and links directing users to original sources. Perplexity keeps traffic on its own platform while delivering Times-originated content directly to paying subscribers.

Additionally, court documents show that Perplexity’s training data included millions of Times articles obtained without authorization. These articles formed part of the foundation for the AI models powering the search platform. The startup never disclosed this practice to the Times or sought permission for model training.

Lawsuit Detail	Information
Plaintiff	The New York Times Company
Defendant	Perplexity AI, Inc.
Filing Court	U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Filing Date	December 5, 2025 (Friday)
Case Number	1:25-cv-10106
Key Claims	Copyright infringement, trademark damage, unjust enrichment

The Hallucination Problem: False Attribution and Brand Damage

Beyond copying existing articles, the lawsuit alleges a second major injury: AI hallucinations that Perplexity creates and falsely attributes to the Times. These fabricated or misleading statements appear to come from Times reporting but originate entirely from the AI system. When users encounter these false attributions, they associate misinformation with the Times brand, causing reputational damage.

The Times argues this practice violates both copyright law and trademark protections. The false attributions harm the newspaper’s reputation and credibility. Perplexity generated content that falsely implies Times endorsement without editorial oversight or fact-checking. In one documented example, Perplexity’s system created content attributed to the outlet that lacked factual accuracy, yet users believed it originated from Times journalism.

Breaking News: Multiple Publishers Join the Fight

The Times lawsuit is not isolated. On December 4, 2025, the Chicago Tribune filed a separate federal lawsuit against Perplexity, alleging the same verbatim copying patterns. The Tribune’s complaint includes specific examples where Perplexity’s search API produced complete reproductions of Tribune articles in full. Additionally, Murdoch-owned News Corp entities—including the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, and Barron’s—are pursuing their own legal action against Perplexity for copyright violations.

This coordinated legal assault reflects growing momentum among major publishers to defend their content investments. The Times previously sued OpenAI in 2023 for similar copyright violations. That case remains pending, but the Perplexity litigation suggests publishers view AI-powered search as an increasingly urgent threat requiring court interventions.

Both the Times and Tribune seek injunctive relief to stop the infringing conduct immediately, along with monetary damages. These lawsuits represent the first major legal challenge specifically targeting Perplexity’s core business model—delivering news content directly without compensation.

Why This Case Matters for the Future of AI Search and Content Publishing

The Perplexity litigation establishes a crucial legal precedent about how AI companies can access, use, and reproduce copyrighted material. If the Times succeeds, it could force Perplexity and similar companies to either license content from publishers or fundamentally redesign their products. The outcome will shape whether AI-powered search engines can operate by scraping publisher content or must negotiate paid agreements.

Industry observers note this case arrives amid broader regulatory scrutiny of large language models and their training practices. Congress has explored potential AI legislation addressing data access and attribution. The courts may now address these questions before lawmakers act. Perplexity’s business model essentially depends on accessing and retrieving publisher content at scale—if that practice becomes legally prohibited, the startup faces existential business challenges.

The startup faces added pressure because competitors like OpenAI have begun licensing content agreements with some publishers. News Corp signed a deal with OpenAI, creating a contractual approach to the exact problem the Times now litigates. Perplexity’s refusal to pursue similar licensing may now cost the company significantly in legal defense and potential damages. Industry analysis suggests courts will likely side with publishers on verbatim reproduction claims, given clear copyright protections for published text.

“Upon information and belief, Perplexity has unlawfully copied, distributed, and displayed millions of copyrighted Times stories, videos, images and other works through Perplexity’s search engine and search API, without authorization or license.”

— The New York Times Company, Federal Court Complaint

Sources

• Reuters – Official legal reporting on the New York Times vs. Perplexity lawsuit and copyright allegations
• TechCrunch – Analysis of AI company copyright infringement patterns and Perplexity’s legal challenges
• The Guardian – Coverage of publisher lawsuits and AI startup copyright violations