Breaking news

The New York Times Sues AI Startup Perplexity Over Copyright Infringement

Legal Showdown in the Digital Age

The New York Times has taken decisive legal action against AI search startup Perplexity, accusing the firm of copyright infringement. The suit, filed on Friday, marks the second legal challenge targeting an AI organization, joining similar efforts led by media powerhouses such as the Chicago Tribune and others.

Unlicensed Content and Commercial Products

The Times contends that Perplexity has exploited its copyrighted content by substituting original material in its commercial offerings—without permission or proper remuneration. According to the legal filing, the startup’s reliance on retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) techniques, which gather and repackage information from websites and databases, results in outputs that closely mirror the original texts.

Negotiations, Licensing, And Industry Leverage

This litigation emerges amidst ongoing negotiations between media companies and AI firms. While some publishers, including The New York Times, have engaged in licensing agreements—such as the multi-year deal with Amazon—publishers are increasingly using lawsuits as leverage. They aim to force AI companies to enter formal licensing agreements that fairly compensate creators and preserve the economic sustainability of quality journalism.

Countermeasures and Industry Precedents

In response to mounting compensation demands, Perplexity introduced a Publishers’ Program last year. This initiative offers ad revenue sharing to prominent publications like Gannett, TIME, Fortune, and the Los Angeles Times. More recently, the company launched Comet Plus—allocating 80% of its monthly fee to participating publishers—and secured a significant multi-year licensing deal with Getty Images. Despite these measures, critics argue that platforms like Perplexity continue to undermine the value of original, paywalled journalism.

Industry Responses and Historic Battles

Graham James, a spokesperson for The New York Times, asserted, “While we believe in the ethical and responsible use of AI, we firmly object to Perplexity’s unlicensed use of our content. RAG allows Perplexity to crawl the internet and steal content from behind our paywall, which should remain exclusive to our subscribers.” Perplexity’s head of communications, Jesse Dwyer, responded by noting that legal challenges against disruptive technology have a longstanding history, from radio and television to the internet and social media.

Implications For The Future Of Copyright And AI

This lawsuit, following past legal actions against companies such as OpenAI and its backer Microsoft, underscores the escalating tension between traditional publishers and tech innovators. Court decisions—like the recent case against Anthropic for using pirated texts—suggest that the legal framework around fair use and content training may evolve significantly as AI technology pushes boundaries.

A Pivotal Moment In Media And Technology

By holding Perplexity accountable for its commercial practices, The New York Times seeks not only to recoup damages but also to set a precedent that ensures content creators receive due compensation. This legal maneuver is emblematic of a broader strategy by legacy publishers to secure the economic viability of their work in an era increasingly dominated by automated, AI-driven content generation.

China’s Humanoid Robot Boom Faces A Bigger Question: Can These Machines Make Money?

Unitree’s $9 Billion Bet On The Future Of Robotics

China’s humanoid robotics industry is attracting huge investor interest, but as Unitree Robotics prepares for its public debut, questions are growing over whether its robots can move beyond impressive acrobatics and become commercially viable tools.

The Hangzhou-based startup priced its IPO at 150.8 yuan ($22.4) per share, raising $900 million and valuing the company at 61 billion yuan, or about $9 billion. The offering attracted record retail demand on Shanghai’s STAR Market, with the online tranche oversubscribed more than 5,000 times and a winning rate of just 0.018%. Strategic investors included AI startup DeepSeek.

A Unitree-linked pre-IPO perpetual contract was trading at roughly four times the IPO price on Friday, highlighting the speculative interest surrounding the company.

Unitree is known for robots capable of kung fu kicks, backflips and recovering from falls. Yet analysts question whether the technology is ready for large-scale commercial use. “For these humanoid robots, to be honest, they’re fascinating. They can dance and all that, but I’ve never seen them doing any real housework,” said Hao Hong, managing partner of Lotus Asset Management.

In its prospectus, Unitree warned that mass adoption could take longer than expected because robotic hands are still not precise or durable enough for sustained use.

From Acrobatic Robots To Commercial Machines

Even advanced humanoid robots can currently perform only a limited number of tasks and typically operate for a few hours before recharging, according to Dominik Pross, an equity analyst at VP Bank. Most models run for up to four hours, while robots also need to be trained for individual tasks.

“Robots have to be specifically trained for each and every task entrusted to them, even the simplest,” Pross said.

More robotics listings are expected, with Unitree rivals AgiBot and Leju Robotics seeking listings in Hong Kong and Shenzhen. LimX Dynamics founder Will Zhang said last month that “listing is a must.”

China’s Cost Advantage

China’s manufacturing scale has helped it establish a leading position in robotics. Wood Mackenzie expects the global humanoid robot fleet to surpass 10 million units by 2035, while China already accounts for more than 70% of global industrial robot installations and nearly 90% of humanoids deployed last year.

Average humanoid robot prices fell 93% between 2020 and 2025 to $58,000. Unitree’s flagship G1 costs $16,000, while SemiAnalysis estimates that the company has cut the price of its G1 EDU model by more than 45% to $27,300, while maintaining a 67% gross margin.

Falling prices and government support are attracting investment, but analysts say it will take time to prove that humanoid robots can generate strong returns. Unitree’s revenue more than quadrupled last year, although adjusted first-quarter profit fell more than 52% as research and development and marketing spending increased. Nearly three-quarters of its humanoid revenue in the first nine months of 2025 came from research and education, highlighting the gap between demonstrations and widespread commercial use.

“Unlike many early-stage robotics companies, the Unitree story is backed by real revenue growth,” said Jeff Ko, chief analyst at CoinEx. Still, he noted that its $9 billion valuation, at more than 200 times last year’s earnings, reflects significant speculative interest.

Geopolitical Risks

Unitree’s IPO momentum has continued despite growing pressure on Chinese robotics companies. The U.S. moved last month to ban imports of foreign-made humanoid and four-legged robots, potentially exposing Unitree, which generated about 13% of its revenue from the U.S. last year.

Access to Nvidia hardware and software is another risk, as Chinese robotics companies rely on the technology to power their systems. “Chinese robot producers are not yet in a position to do without Western components completely,” Pross said.

China’s control over rare earths used in robot actuators and motors could nevertheless give its manufacturers an advantage, according to Bernstein analyst Dien Wang.

The Bigger Robotics Opportunity

The potential market is attracting major players, including Tesla, whose CEO Elon Musk is expanding production plans for Optimus humanoid robots. At the same time, some researchers argue that the future of robotics will not be limited to humanoids: quadruped and purpose-built robots can be cheaper and more reliable for repetitive industrial tasks, while humanoids may be better suited to unpredictable environments.

For Unitree, the challenge is no longer proving that its robots can perform impressive tricks. It is proving that they can do enough useful work to justify a $9 billion valuation.

Aretilaw firm
The Future Forbes Realty Global Properties
Uol
eCredo

Become a Speaker

Become a Speaker

Become a Partner

Subscribe for our weekly newsletter