Controversy between New York Times and Perplexity on the use of content | Festina Lente - Your leading source of AI news | Turtles AI

The New York Times has taken legal actions against perplexity, accusing the company of using protected content without authorization. This clash highlights the growing tensions between publishers and artificial intelligence tools, with significant implications for the sector.

Key points:

• The New York Times sent a perplexity cessation letter for unauthorized use of its content.
• The accusation is based on the violation of copyright laws and unfair enrichment.
• Perplexity is already in the sights of other publishers for little ethical scraping practices.
• Despite the disputes, Perplexity has started a program for sharing advertising revenues to collaborate with publishers.

The New York Times has recently implemented a series of legal measures against Perplexity, a company of AI supported by Jeff Bezos, accusing it of accessing and using its content without a license to generate summaries and other productions based on AI. In the official communication, NYT states that Perplexity has an illegal advantage of articles written carefully, whose unauthorized use would represent a violation of copyright regulations. This is not an isolated case; The NYT is currently also pursuing Openii, believing that Chatgpt has used protected content without consent for its training.

In addition, the Wall Street Journal has highlighted how other publications have accused perplexity of adopting scraping practices of non -ethical content. A recent analysis conducted by Copyleaks has revealed that Perplexity had access to content subject to Paywall, arousing concerns among journalists and publishers regarding the integrity of their materials. Despite these disputes, Perplexity has started a program for sharing advertising revenues, proposing to return part of the income to publishers, as an attempt to improve relationships with the sector. Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity, told the WSJ that the company does not intend to take an antagonistic attitude, expressing interest in collaborating with the NYT to find a shared solution.

The issue raises questions about the methods of use of the contents by the AI ​​platforms and on the ethical and legal responsibilities that derive from it.