Following Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over allegations of using copyrighted books to train its AI models, a new wave of legal action is unfolding in the AI industry. This week, the Britannica Group—the parent company of Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster—filed a lawsuit against Perplexity AI in a New York federal court, accusing the AI startup of infringing on its copyrights and trademarks. The complaint alleges that Perplexity’s answer engine, which delivers concise summaries of user queries by pulling data from across the web, frequently reproduces content from Britannica’s sites verbatim without authorization. The company claims this practice diverts traffic away from its own platforms, directly undermining its subscription and advertising revenue streams. Britannica argues that its content is the result of significant investment in research and editorial work, and that Perplexity is profiting from that effort without consent. “Perplexity claims to be the ‘world’s first answer engine,’ but the answers they provide to consumers are often Britannica’s answers,” said Jorge Cauz, CEO of the Britannica Group, in a press release. The lawsuit also highlights that Perplexity has attributed AI-generated hallucinations—fabricated or inaccurate information—to Britannica, potentially damaging the brand’s reputation. Perplexity, founded in 2022, has positioned itself as an AI-powered tool for information discovery, often described as a “Swiss Army knife for curiosity.” The company gained attention in August when it made a $34.5 billion bid to acquire Google’s Chrome browser. However, its rapid growth has come with legal scrutiny. Last year, Rupert Murdoch’s Dow Jones sued Perplexity over alleged unauthorized use of content from The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post. This latest lawsuit arrives at a pivotal moment in the AI legal landscape. Anthropic’s recent settlement—where it agreed to pay $1.5 billion to resolve claims of using pirated books to train its Claude chatbot—has set a precedent that could embolden other publishers to pursue similar claims. Since the rise of generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude, media companies have increasingly pushed back against the use of their content for training models and generating responses. While OpenAI continues to face a high-profile lawsuit from The New York Times, other tech firms have begun striking licensing deals to avoid litigation. Google, for example, has partnered with News Corp and Reddit to legally access content for AI training. In August, Perplexity announced plans to share a portion of its revenue with news publishers whose content it uses in its answers—though it remains unclear whether this applies to reference materials like Britannica. The Britannica Group is seeking unspecified monetary damages and a court order to stop Perplexity from using its content without permission. Perplexity has not yet issued a public response to the lawsuit. As AI companies continue to scale, the legal battles over intellectual property are likely to intensify, shaping how the industry balances innovation with fair use.