Perplexity AI sued for copyright infringement by Japan’s top newspapers Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun

Perplexity AI has landed in hot water in Tokyo. Two of Japan’s most influential newspapers, Nikkei and The Asahi Shimbun, are taking the San Francisco–based startup to court, accusing it of copying and misusing their journalism to fuel its AI engine. The lawsuit, filed at the Tokyo District Court, demands an immediate halt to the practice and seeks damages of roughly $30 million.

Bloomberg confirmed the filing, reporting: “Nikkei Inc. and the Asahi Shimbun Co. sued artificial-intelligence startup Perplexity AI Inc. for copyright infringement, joining other news organizations in Japan and the US that are challenging the use of their content in AI tools. The newspapers are seeking an injunction and ¥2.2 billion ($15 million) each in damages from Perplexity, they said in a joint statement Tuesday. The suit was filed at the Tokyo District Court.”

Japan’s Top Newspapers Sue AI Startup Perplexity for $30M Over Copyright ‘Free Riding’

The case marks a new front in the growing backlash against AI firms accused of “free riding” on newsrooms’ work. According to the publishers, Perplexity has been pulling articles—some behind paywalls—and feeding them into its system to generate responses, even after the outlets tried to block the company using technical safeguards. Both Nikkei and Asahi say their names and reporting were cited in Perplexity’s answers, but that the results were riddled with inaccuracies, distorting their journalism and eroding trust.

The complaint points to violations of Japan’s Copyright Act, covering reproduction, adaptation, and public transmission rights. It also accuses Perplexity of unfair competition for harming the credibility of the papers, which argue that their reporting is the product of costly and time-intensive work. In a news release, Nikkei said:

“We will continue to appeal to society about the importance of protecting sound journalism, which supports the foundation of democracy.” Asahi echoed the stance, calling the continued scraping “unacceptable” and labeling the practice as “large-scale, ongoing ‘free riding.’”

Founded in 2022 by a team of former Google and OpenAI engineers, Perplexity bills itself as an “answer engine” designed to provide quick, sourced responses to queries, distinguishing itself from search incumbents like Google. The company has raised hefty funding, is valued in the billions, and has tried to mend ties with publishers through a revenue-sharing program and a $5 subscription tier called Comet Plus. That program promises to pay 80% of a $42.5 million pool to publishers, but critics argue it doesn’t erase the damage from past scraping.

Perplexity AI CEO Aravind Srinivas

Perplexity has already faced scrutiny for its methods. In 2024, reports surfaced that it scraped outlets like Forbes and Wired without permission, allegedly spoofing browsers and cycling IP addresses to get around restrictions. As of now, the startup hasn’t commented publicly on the lawsuit.

The fight in Tokyo adds to a swelling wave of legal battles against AI companies. Earlier this month, three other Japanese newspapers sued a rival AI firm, while in the U.S., The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal are suing OpenAI and Microsoft. The Financial Times’ parent company has filed a similar case in the UK. Each of these suits raises the same question: are AI companies building their products on stolen work?

For Japan, the answer could set an important precedent. Nikkei and Asahi are not just any publishers—they are historic institutions with deep influence over public debate. Nikkei, with more than 1,500 journalists worldwide, also owns the Financial Times. Asahi, founded in 1879, has long been a heavyweight in shaping national discourse. A ruling in their favor could have far-reaching implications, shaping how AI companies worldwide handle copyrighted journalism.

For now, Perplexity is left to defend its practices in court as the pressure on AI firms intensifies—and the battle over who gets paid for digital knowledge creation moves squarely into the legal arena.