New York Times and Chicago Tribune Sue Perplexity AI for Mass Copyright Infringement in Landmark 2025 Case

• Why Are Major Publishers Taking Perplexity AI to Court?
• How Does This Fit Into the Broader AI Copyright Wars?
• Meta’s Licensing Strategy: A Blueprint for AI Firms?
• What’s at Stake for Journalism’s Financial Future?
• Could This Reshape Copyright Law for the AI Era?
• How Are Other AI Companies Responding?
• What’s Next in the Legal Timeline?
• *

In a high-stakes legal battle that could redefine the boundaries of AI and journalism, the New York Times and Chicago Tribune have filed lawsuits against Perplexity AI, accusing the startup of systematically scraping copyrighted content to fuel its AI-powered search engine. The publishers claim this threatens their revenue models and journalistic integrity. Meanwhile, Meta takes a contrasting approach by striking licensing deals with major news outlets. This article dives into the legal, financial, and ethical implications of AI’s content use—complete with expert insights and global case studies.

Why Are Major Publishers Taking Perplexity AI to Court?

The New York Times alleges Perplexity’s AI reproduces full articles verbatim, bypassing paywalls and diverting traffic from their website. Chicago Tribune echoes this, stating their investigative reports are being repackaged as AI answers without compensation. "This isn’t just about royalties—it’s existential," a Tribune spokesperson told me. Perplexity’s RAG technology, which pulls real-time data from websites, is at the heart of the dispute. Interestingly, Perplexity’s comms chief Jesse Dwyer compared the lawsuits to historic resistance against radio and TV, quipping, "Thankfully, those lawsuits failed, or we’d all be communicating via telegram."

How Does This Fit Into the Broader AI Copyright Wars?

With over 40 active U.S. lawsuits against AI firms (including cases from Dow Jones and Reddit), this is part of a global pattern. Japanese publishers Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun, plus Italy’s Medusa Film (owned by the Berlusconis), have sued Perplexity for unauthorized use of films and articles. "AI summaries are cannibalizing our ad revenue and subscriptions," admits a European media exec. Even Encyclopedia Britannica joined the fray—quite the irony for a company once disrupted by Wikipedia.

Meta’s Licensing Strategy: A Blueprint for AI Firms?

While Perplexity fights lawsuits, Meta’s parent company is cutting checks. Their deals with CNN, Fox News, and Le Monde allow legal use of content for Meta’s AI chatbot—with proper attribution and links. Financial terms are hush-hush, but insiders suggest payouts are tied to traffic referrals. "It’s the Spotify model applied to news," notes a BTCC market analyst. This approach may pressure other AI firms to negotiate rather than scrape.

What’s at Stake for Journalism’s Financial Future?

Publishers argue AI-generated summaries depress:

• Subscription growth: Why pay $100/year when AI gives free summaries?
• Ad revenue: Fewer pageviews mean lower CPM rates.
• Brand authority: Errors in AI answers get blamed on original sources.

Could This Reshape Copyright Law for the AI Era?

Legal experts are split. Some cite precedents like(which survived lawsuits by driving traffic), while others point to(where unlicensed training data led to settlements). "Fair use arguments get shaky when AI outputs compete directly with sources," says a Stanford Law professor. The cases may hinge on whether courts view AI answers as "transformative" or mere derivatives.