
Perplexity, the AI-powered search engine accused of copyright infringement by News Corp, has officially responded to the lawsuit, calling the claims "misleading at best" and defending its business practices as legally sound and transformative. News Corp, meanwhile, has issued a public statement doubling down on its stance, accusing Perplexity of undermining the entire news industry.

Perplexity's response to the lawsuit, which was filed earlier this week by News Corp publications including The Wall Street Journal and New York Post, expressed disappointment over the legal action. In a blog post, the AI startup insisted that its practices align with long-established legal norms and that its technology serves an important function in providing accessible knowledge to the public. "We were disappointed and surprised to see this," Perplexity stated. "The common theme betrayed by these complaints collectively is that they wish this technology didn’t exist."
Perplexity's response highlighted its commitment to transparency, noting that its platform always includes sources above answers and provides in-line citations, setting an example for other AI tools. It also mentioned its revenue-sharing agreements with major publishers such as TIME, Fortune, and Der Spiegel, in contrast to what it termed as News Corp's refusal to cooperate in a constructive manner. "Our door is always open if and when the Post and the Journal decide to work with us in good faith, just as numerous others already have," the company stated.
The AI firm also took issue with News Corp's allegations of misleading content and false attributions. Perplexity claimed that examples cited in the lawsuit were "disingenuous," suggesting that News Corp misrepresented both the specific outputs and the broader purpose of its platform. Perplexity also refuted claims that it ignored outreach from News Corp, asserting that it responded promptly to News Corp's initial contact, only for the lawsuit to follow soon after.
In an effort to frame the broader conflict between AI platforms and traditional media as counterproductive, Perplexity stated, "The lawsuit reflects an adversarial posture between media and tech that is—while depressingly familiar—fundamentally shortsighted, unnecessary, and self-defeating." The startup called on the publishing industry to pursue partnerships that could create "genuinely pie-expanding businesses" rather than resorting to litigation.
News Corp, however, remains firm in its position. In a statement, CEO Robert Thomson characterized Perplexity's actions as "an abuse of intellectual property," particularly criticizing the company's "Skip the Links" feature as a way to avoid compensating publishers.
Perplexity perpetrates an abuse of intellectual property that harms journalists, writers, publishers and News Corp. The perplexing Perplexity has willfully copied copious amounts of copyrighted material without compensation, and shamelessly presents repurposed material as a direct substitute for the original source. Perplexity proudly states that users can “skip the links” — apparently, Perplexity wants to skip the check.
We applaud principled companies like OpenAI, which understands that integrity and creativity are essential if we are to realise the potential of Artificial Intelligence. Perplexity is not the only AI company abusing intellectual property and it is not the only AI company that we will pursue with vigor and rigor. We have made clear that we would rather woo than sue, but, for the sake of our journalists, our writers and our company, we must challenge the content kleptocracy.
The public statements from both sides underline the growing divide between generative AI companies and traditional media outlets. Perplexity's stance frames AI-enhanced search as an inevitable evolution in information dissemination, one that can coexist with existing media frameworks if given the chance. News Corp, on the other hand, sees Perplexity's practices as a direct threat to the integrity and economic sustainability of journalism.
With AI tools becoming more prevalent and regulations still in flux, this lawsuit—and Perplexity's combative response—reflect a broader battle over intellectual property in the age of AI. Perplexity made it clear that it does not intend to back down, stating, "AI-enhanced search engines are not going away. Perplexity is not going away."