\n
![](\"https:\/\/readwrite.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/perplexity-ai-900x600.jpg\")
<\/p>\n [ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
The global mass media company Cond\u00e9 Nast has allegedly sent a cease-and-desist letter to AI company Perplexity following concerns around plagiarism.<\/p>\n
The company owns numerous large magazines and publishers, including Vogue, Vanity Fair, Glamour, GQ, and more.<\/p>\n
According to The Information<\/a>, who say they obtained a copy of the letter, the cease-and-desist has demanded the AI startup stop using content from their publications in its search results.<\/p>\n Perplexity is a two-year-old company that is essentially an AI-enhanced search tool<\/a>. It combines elements from the likes of ChatGPT<\/a> and Google Search. The advanced chatbot<\/a> can answer queries and integrate recent articles within its responses.<\/p>\n It does this by indexing the web daily so that it can return information about the latest news, sports scores, and other commonly searched topics. When delivering the information, it includes a list of references and provides footnotes.<\/p>\n Neither Cond\u00e9 Nast nor Perplexity have spoken publicly about the rumored letter.<\/p>\n This move by Cond\u00e9 Nast follows Forbes which was also reported to have sent a letter to the CEO of the start-up in June accusing them of stealing text and images in a \u2018willful infringement\u2019 of their copyright rights.<\/p>\n Forbes\u2019 editor and chief content officer, Randall Lane, charged Perplexity with committing \u201ccynical theft,\u201d<\/a> accusing the company of creating \u201cknockoff stories\u201d that contain \u201ceerily similar wording\u201d and \u201centirely lifted fragments\u201d from its articles.<\/p>\n The Executive Editor of Tech and Innovation at Forbes, John Paczkowski, even took to X (formerly Twitter) to say how the AI chatbot \u201crips off most of our reporting.\u201d<\/p>\n Our reporting on Eric Schmidt\u2019s stealth drone project was posted this AM by @perplexity_ai<\/a> . It rips off most of our reporting. It cites us, and a few that reblogged us, as sources in the most easily ignored way possible. Note the views. #zeroclick<\/a> https:\/\/t.co\/qZamti9E83<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/8z2AsyHjgM<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 John Paczkowski (@JohnPaczkowski) June 7, 2024<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n The Perplexity CEO Aravind Srinivas then responded by saying the feature \u2018Perplexity Pages\u2019 has \u201crough edges\u201d and is being improved on with more feedback.<\/p>\n \u200b\u200b<\/p>\n Thanks for flagging this. The screenshot you shared is of a new product feature we released two weeks ago called “Perplexity Pages”. It has rough edges, and we are improving it with more feedback. The core Perplexity product has, from day one, had appropriate source attribution\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/8GGLFUQGWy<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 Aravind Srinivas (@AravSrinivas) June 7, 2024<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n He writes how the tool has \u201cfrom day one, had appropriate source attribution in the most prominent way, unlike other chatbots on the market like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Copilot\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n Featured Image: Via Flickr<\/a><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\nAI chatbot Perplexity under fire from publishers<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n
\n