Artificial Intelligence

Perplexity AI Says 'You Can't Copyright Facts' in Defense Against CNN Copyright Suit

North America / United States0 views1 min
Perplexity AI Says 'You Can't Copyright Facts' in Defense Against CNN Copyright Suit

CNN filed a copyright lawsuit against Perplexity AI in New York District Court, accusing the company of using over 17,000 of its stories, videos, and images without permission despite failed licensing talks. Perplexity defended itself by claiming 'you can't copyright facts,' while CNN argued that the way facts are presented qualifies for protection and that AI firms should pay for content use.

CNN has sued Perplexity AI in a New York District Court, alleging the company infringed copyright by using 17,000 of its stories, videos, and images without authorization. The lawsuit, filed Thursday, follows failed licensing negotiations between CNN and Perplexity, similar to deals CNN struck with Meta in 2025. CNN claims Perplexity, valued at tens of billions, exploits original content without compensation, harming publishers financially. Perplexity responded by stating 'you can't copyright facts,' citing U.S. Copyright Office guidelines that facts, ideas, and methods are not protected. However, CNN argues that the presentation of facts—even in short articles—qualifies for copyright protection. Legal experts, including Michael Goodyear of New York Law School, note that while facts may not be protected, the way they are expressed could be, depending on whether AI systems copy verbatim or paraphrase. This lawsuit is part of a broader wave of over 100 copyright claims against AI companies like OpenAI and Anthropic, with no appellate courts yet ruling on fair use in AI training. The dispute highlights tensions between publishers losing revenue due to AI scraping and tech firms relying on unlicensed data. A report from the Open Markets Institute found AI crawlers bypassing paywalls have surged from 3.3% to 12.9% in six months, worsening financial pressures on media outlets. Perplexity has not yet commented further on the case. The outcome could set a precedent for how AI companies use copyrighted material, with publishers pushing for licensing deals to monetize content while AI firms argue for broader access to public data.

This content was automatically generated and/or translated by AI. It may contain inaccuracies. Please refer to the original sources for verification.

Comments (0)

Log in to comment.

Loading...