The New York Times has taken legal action against AI startup Perplexity, issuing a cease-and-desist letter for allegedly copying its articles to create summaries without permission.

This move is part of a broader trend where traditional media companies are increasingly concerned about AI's use of copyrighted material, particularly as they face challenges in monetizing their content.

Publishers are raising alarms over AI technologies that summarize information, fearing these could undermine original journalism and reduce website traffic and revenue.

Many AI companies, including Perplexity, argue that scraping content constitutes 'fair use,' although this legal stance remains untested in court.

The legal dispute underscores ongoing tensions between media organizations and AI firms regarding content usage rights, with fair use expected to be a key issue.

The Times' letter claims that Perplexity has been 'unjustly enriched' by using its journalism without a license, which allegedly violates copyright laws.

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

To address concerns, Perplexity recently introduced an ad-revenue sharing scheme aimed at compensating publishers for content cited by its AI.

Perplexity has faced similar accusations of unethical web scraping practices from other organizations, including Forbes and Wired.

In response to the cease-and-desist notice, Perplexity plans to address the legal demands by the deadline set for the end of October.

The Wall Street Journal reported on this development, highlighting the increasing scrutiny of AI companies' practices in relation to content usage.

A study by Copyleaks has raised concerns about Perplexity's ability to summarize paywalled content from various publishers, further complicating the legal landscape.