Perplexity CEO Dodges Plagiarism Questions Amid Ongoing Publisher Lawsuits
Perplexity's CEO refuses to define plagiarism during a TechCrunch Disrupt interview while facing lawsuits from major publishers like News Corp. He defends the AI search engine by comparing it to traditional journalism and highlighting new revenue-share partnerships.
Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas refuses to define exactly what constitutes plagiarism during an onstage interview at TechCrunch Disrupt 2024. This evasive answer comes at a sensitive time, as major publishers like News Corp's Dow Jones and the New York Post sue the AI search startup for allegedly creating a "content kleptocracy." The New York Times also recently sends a cease and desist letter to the company over these exact concerns.
Srinivas strongly defends his product by stating that Perplexity simply surfaces and summarizes web content exactly like a journalist, academic, or student does. He emphasizes that the platform always cites its sources, although he admits the footnotes are not always extremely precise. However, a recent report from AI plagiarism detector Copyleaks reveals that one Perplexity summary paraphrases 48% of a Forbes article, directly contradicting the company's implied innocence.
To counter the negative press from these legal battles, Srinivas highlights Perplexity's ongoing revenue-share program with media companies like Time, Fortune, and Der Spiegel. He claims that Dow Jones was a potential partner but chose to escalate the situation and mislead the public about Perplexity's response time. Additionally, Srinivas pushes back against claims that users primarily rely on Perplexity to bypass paywalls, insisting instead that most visitors seek factual information.