The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has launched a fierce accusation against artificial intelligence search engine startup Perplexity. The broadcaster claims that Perplexity scraped its content without permission to train AI models. According to a report from the Financial Times, the BBC sent a legal letter to Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas, demanding that the company stop using its content unlawfully. The broadcaster has also asked Perplexity to delete the data already used for model training and to submit a compensation proposal.
In the letter, the BBC detailed its grievances. It claimed that Perplexity reproduced entire sections of its articles and inserted them into its AI-generated search results. These results, according to the BBC, often included direct links to original articles, giving the illusion of permission or collaboration. But the broadcaster says it never gave such consent.
The BBC confirmed the letter’s contents in a statement to Reuters. It clarified that its intellectual property faced clear violations and emphasized its readiness to pursue legal action if Perplexity failed to comply. “We protect our journalism and our intellectual property,” the BBC stated. “Unauthorized use of our content, particularly to train competing AI models, undermines the integrity of our work.”
This isn’t the first time Perplexity has found itself under fire. Previously, prominent media outlets such as Forbes and Wired accused the startup of plagiarizing their content. In response to those controversies, Perplexity rolled out a revenue-sharing model designed to calm publisher concerns. The model, however, has not prevented ongoing legal disputes.
In fact, Perplexity’s trouble with publishers dates back months. In October 2023, The New York Times sent the company a cease and desist notice. The newspaper alleged that Perplexity used its reporting to train its AI without authorization. It labeled the actions a breach of copyright law and threatened litigation.
Despite these mounting legal threats, Perplexity has continued to grow. It has attracted backing from some of the biggest names in technology and finance. Investors include Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, AI chipmaker Nvidia, and SoftBank Group from Japan. These powerhouses believe in Perplexity’s long-term potential in the AI search space. The company aims to challenge traditional search engines by offering direct, conversational answers instead of linking users to websites.
That vision, however, has placed the startup in direct conflict with news organizations and content creators. AI models like Perplexity’s rely on massive amounts of data. Many companies in the space gather this data from publicly available sources across the web. But using journalistic content without authorization crosses a legal and ethical line.
Perplexity rejected the BBC’s claims. In a bold statement, the company accused the broadcaster of misunderstanding how AI works. “The BBC’s accusations are manipulative and opportunistic,” the startup said. “They reveal a fundamental lack of understanding of technology, the internet, and intellectual property law.”
The company framed its model as one that uses only publicly available information. It insisted that it respects copyright laws and doesn’t steal or store proprietary data. But this defense hasn’t satisfied many in the media industry. Journalists and publishers argue that “public availability” does not equal “free to exploit.” They warn that AI companies should not build billion-dollar businesses off the backs of others’ labor.
At the heart of the dispute lies a crucial legal and moral question: who owns information in the age of artificial intelligence? AI models don’t just read articles—they learn from them. These systems absorb style, language, structure, and insight. If that training data comes from high-quality journalism, then the value flows from the publisher to the model. But most AI startups, including Perplexity, do not pay for that value.
Instead, they often monetize the knowledge gained from journalistic sources. They answer user queries with AI-generated summaries or insights derived from scraped content. These answers bypass the original source and, in turn, reduce traffic to publisher websites. This leads to lost ad revenue and dwindling subscriptions for the original creators.
To address this imbalance, some AI firms have signed licensing agreements with publishers. OpenAI, for instance, signed content deals with Axel Springer, The Associated Press, and Financial Times. These agreements compensate media companies and give AI firms access to reliable, high-quality data. But Perplexity has yet to announce any such partnerships on a large scale.
That gap is widening the rift between AI developers and the journalism industry. Experts warn that without clear standards, these disputes will only grow more frequent and more severe. Courts may soon need to decide what constitutes fair use in the AI era.
Meanwhile, Perplexity continues to attract investor interest. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the startup is in advanced talks to raise $500 million in new funding. If successful, the raise would boost Perplexity’s valuation to $14 billion—a massive leap for a company founded only in 2022. This surge in valuation underscores just how valuable AI search technology has become.
Still, legal headwinds threaten to slow the company’s rise. Lawsuits and public backlash could damage its reputation and strain investor confidence. If more publishers follow the BBC’s example, Perplexity may face significant financial liabilities. Its future will depend on how it navigates these challenges—and whether it can establish trust with the media industry before the courts weigh in.
The BBC’s decision to escalate the conflict marks a turning point. As one of the world’s most respected public broadcasters, its involvement adds credibility to the concerns many publishers share. More than a fight over one company’s practices, this battle may shape the rules for an entire generation of AI development.
Also Read – Startup Founders Can Retain ESOPs Before IPO: SEBI