Lawsuit tracker

Dow Jones v. Perplexity

Dow Jones & Co., Inc. and NYP Holdings, Inc. v. Perplexity AI, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-07984 (S.D.N.Y.)

PlaintiffsDow Jones (publisher of The Wall Street Journal) and NYP Holdings (New York Post), both News Corp companies
DefendantsPerplexity AI
CourtU.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Judge Katherine Polk Failla)
Filed2024-10-21
StatusActive
Content typejournalism
Last updated2026-07-21
Verified against the cited sources at last update. Litigation moves fast — check the sources below for the current status.

The claims

Copyright infringement over Perplexity’s retrieval-augmented answer engine — both the copying of articles into its index and outputs that reproduce or closely paraphrase them — plus trademark dilution and false-designation claims over answers, including hallucinated content, presented under the papers’ names. The publishers seek up to $150,000 per infringed work.

What has happened

News Corp’s flagship papers sued Perplexity over its answer engine, alleging it copies their articles wholesale into a retrieval index and serves outputs that substitute for reading the originals, diverting traffic and revenue. The complaint pairs copyright claims with trademark theories over answers — including allegedly hallucinated ones — attributed to the Journal and the Post. Perplexity tried to escape New York, moving to dismiss for improper venue or transfer to California; Judge Failla denied the motion in full in August 2025, pointing to Perplexity’s New York office, staff and marketing, and holding its user-agreement forum clause does not bind publishers who never used the product as customers. The case is now deep in discovery, including court-ordered searches of the founders’ personal email accounts.

Key developments

  • 2024-10-21Dow Jones and the New York Post sue — the first major U.S. publisher case aimed squarely at a retrieval-augmented answer engine rather than model training alone.
  • 2025-02-18Perplexity moves to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, or to transfer the case to the Northern District of California.
  • 2025-08-21Judge Failla denies Perplexity’s motion in full; the case stays in the S.D.N.Y.
  • 2026-03-20At a discovery conference, Failla orders Perplexity to search its founders’ personal email accounts — used for company business — from January 2022 through February 2026, with production due July 15, 2026.

Why it matters for training data

Retrieval is not a loophole: grounded, cite-and-summarize products face the same copyright exposure as training pipelines, with trademark exposure stacked on top when outputs misattribute. And consumer EULA venue clauses will not drag rights holders to a vendor’s home forum. Buyers of RAG services should treat content licensing for the index as seriously as licensing for training.

Sources

Deeper analysis

← All case files Weekly lawsuit news

Want data that clears this in diligence?

Whether you're building a model or sitting on an archive, the first conversation is short and specific.

Send a brief