Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster Sue Perplexity AI Over Copyright Infringement

Encyclopedia Britannica sues Perplexity over AI 'answer engine'

Sept 11 (Reuters) - Perplexity AI is the latest artificial intelligence company to be hit with a lawsuit by copyright holders, accused by Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster of misusing their content in its "answer engine" for internet searches. The reference companies alleged, opens new tab in New York federal court on Wednesday that Perplexity unlawfully copied their material and diminished their revenue by redirecting their web traffic to its AI-generated summaries. Spokespeople for Perplexity and attorneys and spokespeople for Britannica, which owns Merriam-Webster, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday. The lawsuit is one of several high-stakes cases brought by authors, news outlets and other content owners against tech companies for using their material without permission in AI systems. Perplexity's "answer engine" searches the internet for users and summarizes what it finds, providing an AI-based alternative to traditional search engines like Google. The lawsuit said Perplexity's system "free rides" on Britannica and Merriam-Webster's work by summarizing their articles and diverting traffic that would otherwise go to their websites. Perplexity is facing a similar lawsuit from News Corp's (NWSA.O), opens new tab Dow Jones and the New York Post for allegedly misusing their articles in its search engine. Britannica and Merriam-Webster's complaint said Perplexity infringed their copyrights by scraping their websites, copying their articles and reproducing their content without permission. They also accused the startup of violating their trademark rights by attributing AI-hallucinated material to them. Britannica and Merriam-Webster requested an unspecified amount of monetary damages and an order blocking Perplexity from misusing their content. The case is Encyclopedia Britannica Inc v. Perplexity AI Inc, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 1:25-cv-07546. For Britannica: Ian Crosby, Davida Brook and Gloria Park of Susman Godfrey For Perplexity: attorney information not yet available Murdoch's Dow Jones, New York Post sue Perplexity AI for 'illegal' copying of content Reporting by Blake Brittain in Washington Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab * Suggested Topics: * Litigation * Intellectual Property Blake Brittain Thomson Reuters Blake Brittain reports on intellectual property law, including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets, for Reuters Legal. He has previously written for Bloomberg Law and Thomson Reuters Practical Law and practiced as an attorney.

Perplexity's definition of copyright gets it sued by the dictionary

Merriam-Webster and its parent company Encyclopedia Britannica are the latest to take on AI in court. The plaintiffs have sued Perplexity, claiming that AI company's "answer engine" product unlawfully copies their copyrighted materials. They are also alleging copyright infringement for instances where Perplexity's AI creates false or inaccurate hallucinations that it then wrongly attributes to Britannica or Merriam-Webster. The , filed in New York federal court, is seeking unspecified monetary damages and an order that blocks Perplexity from misusing their content. "Perplexity's so-called "answer engine" eliminates users' clicks on Plaintiffs' and other web publishers' websites -- and, in turn, starves web publishers of revenue -- by generating responses to users' queries that substitute the content from other information websites," the filing reads. "To build its substitute product, Perplexity engages in massive copying of Plaintiffs' and other web publishers' protected content without authorization or remuneration."

Perplexity hit with a lawsuit by two knowledge titans

They're accusing the AI company of 'cannibalizing' traffic to their websites, impacting revenue. Perplexity is an AI-powered search tool that excels at delivering speedy and relevant answers in a conversational tone. But it's now come up against two long-established giants of knowledge dissemination in the form of Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster, which have hit it with a lawsuit. Britannica and Merriam-Webster are accusing Perplexity of copyright infringement and trademark violation, Reuters reported on Thursday. They also claim that the San Francisco-based company has impacted their revenue by shifting web traffic away from their sites and to its own AI tool. Recommended Videos The case is the latest in a series of lawsuits targeting generative-AI companies like Perplexity and ChatGPT's OpenAI, as well as larger outfits like Google, which is also building its own AI-powered tools. While most of the lawsuit are about AI firms scraping content from the web to train their AI models without first getting permission from the copyright holders, the one targeting Perplexity is a little different as its AI tool searches the web in real time to gather data for its rapid and concise responses to users' questions, eliminating the need for the user to visit the source's website. The suit, filed this week in New York federal court, says Perplexity's AI tool "free rides" on Britannica and Merriam-Webster's content and as a result is "cannibalizing traffic" to their websites as they rely on visits to sell subscriptions and earn revenue from ads. Britannica and Merriam-Webster accuse Perplexity of infringing their copyrights by reproducing their content without permission. But that's not the only issue. AI tools like Perplexity and ChatGPT are known to sometimes respond with erroneous information in what's known as a "hallucination." Some of Perplexity's hallucinations are apparently attributed to Britannica and Webster's content, which the accusers allege is a violation of their trademarks. The pair are requesting monetary damages from Perplexity. The amount hasn't been revealed. Digital Trends has contacted Perplexity for a response to the legal action by Britannica and Merriam-Webster and we will update this article if we hear back. This isn't the first lawsuit to hit Perplexity. Media giant News Corp, for example, brought similar action in 2024, alleging copyright infringement by improperly using Dow Jones and New York Post articles in Perplexity's online tool without permission. The case is ongoing. The lawsuits against Perplexity, as well as others brought against similar companies, highlight the emerging legal challenges around generative AI, as well as the changing landscape of the internet, with publishers fearful of losing web traffic as users get the information they need from chatbots that are fueled by publishers' content. In a bid to create a fair and sustainable business model, many of the AI firms behind tools like ChatGPT and Perplexity have been seeking revenue-sharing deals with publishers. Perplexity also launched a program last month that offers to pay publishers a fee when its AI uses their content to answer questions.

Britannica and Merriam-Webster Sue Perplexity AI Over Copyright Claims | PYMNTS.com

By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. The complaint alleges that Perplexity copied articles from Britannica and Merriam-Webster and reduced their online traffic by directing users to AI-generated summaries instead of the original sources. Per Reuters, the plaintiffs claim this practice infringes their intellectual property rights and has caused financial harm. Perplexity's platform operates by scanning the internet for information and delivering summarized responses, positioning itself as an alternative to conventional search engines like Google. Britannica and Merriam-Webster argue that this method unfairly benefits from their investment in content creation, effectively "free riding" on their work by replicating it without authorization. The companies also contend that Perplexity violated trademark protections by attributing false or AI-generated information to them, which they say risks damaging their reputation. They are seeking unspecified financial compensation as well as an injunction to prevent further use of their material. Related: Apple Explores Potential AI Deals With Mistral and Perplexity This lawsuit is part of a growing wave of legal challenges against AI developers accused of repurposing copyrighted works without permission. Per Reuters, Perplexity is already facing similar litigation from News Corp's Dow Jones unit and the New York Post. The case, filed under Encyclopedia Britannica Inc v. Perplexity AI Inc in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, is being handled by attorneys Ian Crosby, Davida Brook, and Gloria Park of Susman Godfrey on behalf of Britannica. Lawyers for Perplexity have not yet been identified, and representatives for both sides did not immediately respond to requests for comment.