Perplexity has faced accusations from various media organizations, including Forbes and Wired, regarding unethical web scraping practices to gather content.

A study by Copyleaks has raised concerns that Perplexity can summarize paywalled content from publishers, further complicating the legal landscape surrounding copyright infringement.

The New York Times has initiated legal action against AI startup Perplexity, claiming the company has used its content without authorization.

In a cease and desist letter dated October 2, The Times alleges 'unlawful use' of its articles and seeks clarification on how Perplexity's AI cites its work.

Perplexity's CEO, Aravind Srinivas, has expressed a desire to collaborate with The New York Times and insists that the company does not wish to be adversarial.

In contrast to the legal battles faced by Perplexity, some media companies have opted to partner with OpenAI, allowing access to their copyrighted content for a fee.

Perplexity plans to respond to the cease and desist notice by the deadline of October 30, indicating its intention to address the legal demands.

This lawsuit is part of a broader trend, as The Times has also filed a lawsuit against OpenAI for similar reasons, highlighting ongoing tensions between traditional media and AI companies.

In response to these concerns, Perplexity has introduced an ad-revenue sharing program aimed at compensating publishers for the content cited by its AI.

The legal dispute underscores the increasing anxiety among content creators regarding AI's use of copyrighted material, with fair use emerging as a key issue in these ongoing conflicts.

These developments reflect a growing concern among publishers about how AI technologies could undermine their business models by potentially reducing website traffic and revenue.

Perplexity maintains that it lawfully indexes web pages and provides factual citations, arguing that no single organization can claim ownership over facts.