After the billion dollars of anthropic, dictionaries continue to perplexity AI

The recent $ 1.5 billion regulation of anthropic could open valves for more publishers to pursue AI companies on how they use the content protected by copyright.

This week, the Britannica group, the parent of the Encyclopedia Britannica and the Merriam-Webster dictionary, continued perplexity. Founded on Wednesday before a New York Federal Court, the complaint accuses the startup Buzzy IA of violation of copyright and brand of Britannica and affirms that its response engine reduces the publisher’s income.

The perplexity, founded in 2022, qualified as “Swiss army knife with the Swiss army powered by AI for the discovery and curiosity of information”. The company recently made the headlines in August when it made an offer of $ 34.5 billion to buy the Google Chrome browser.

Perplexity is known for its response engine, which draws data from the web and provides quick and easy -to -read summaries to user questions. Britannica says that these summaries often raise its content quickly without authorization, diverting readers who could otherwise visit its sites, the traffic on which the company is based for subscriptions and advertising dollars.

“Perplexity claims to be the” first engine of response to the world “, but the answers they provide to consumers are often responses from Britannica,” said the CEO of the British group Jorge Cauz, in a press release.

This is not the first legal fight of Perplexity. Last year, Dow Jones of Rupert Murdoch, the parent company of the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post, accused the startup of illegally copying its work.

However, this new trial is just a few weeks after Anthropic agreed to pay $ 1.5 billion to set the complaints he used from millions of pounded pounds to form his Chatbot Claude, reporting that publishers could lead to large payment.

Since the rise of AI tools like Chatgpt and Claude, publishers have pushed technological companies to use their content. IA companies depend on the material published and often protected by copyright such as websites, newspapers, magazines and books to train their important language models and answer questions from users.

OPENAI, for example, is still fighting against a trial in 2023 of the New York Times, even if IT and Google have concluded license agreements with points of sale such as News Corp and Reddit, respectively, to avoid more confrontations. Perplexity himself announced in August that he would soon be starting to share some of his income with publishers whose press articles are used to answer users’ questions.

Why does Britannica continue the perplexity?

Britannica’s complaint indicates that perplexity has scratched its sites, copied and republished articles without authorization, and even awarded hallucinated responses generated by AI which could harm the brand’s reputation. Britannica maintains that these actions violate both copyright and the law on brands.

In addition, Britannica says he can create content thanks to the money he earns thanks to subscriptions and advertising revenues. He accuses Perplexity’s response engine of making free conduct on these investments in “cannibalise traffic” to its sites.

The company requests unpertified monetary damage and a court order prohibiting the use of its content.

The perplexity did not immediately respond to a request for comments from Gizmodo.