AI failures · Fabricated content
New York Times v. Perplexity AI — Lawsuit Alleges Hallucinations Falsely Attributed to the Times
Verified Checked against its sources on 2 sources quoted
- Where it happened
- New York, United States
- Organization
- The New York Times Company (plaintiff); Perplexity AI, Inc. (defendant)
- Date
- Complaint filed December 5, 2025
- Function
- Journalism / Legal
- Where it happened
- News summarization; content attribution
- System
- Perplexity AI
- Technology
- Generative AI
- Type of failure
- Fabricated content
- Caught by
- The person affected
Summary
On December 5, 2025, The New York Times Company sued Perplexity AI in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for copyright and trademark infringement. Besides alleging large-scale copying of its articles, the Times claimed that Perplexity's products generate fabricated information and present it alongside the Times's trademarks, misattributing the false content to the newspaper.
Consequence
- The Times filed a copyright and trademark complaint against Perplexity in the Southern District of New York on December 5, 2025.
Who caught it The person affectedFound outside the organization
Analysis
What could have been done
Checking AI output against its sources
Every factual element of AI output (citations, figures, quotations) is checked against its source before reliance.
The Times alleges in its December 5, 2025, complaint that Perplexity's products generate fabricated information and display it alongside the Times's registered trademarks, attributing the false content to the newspaper; the record reports only the allegation in the complaint.
What would likely have prevented it
- Show a publisher's name or marks next to an answer only when the statements in that answer have been matched to text retrieved from that publisher's content.
- Keep generated wording visibly separate from quoted source material, so a source's name is not attached to text the source did not publish.
What would likely have caught it earlier
- Sample answers that carry a named publisher's attribution, check them against that publisher's articles, and treat complaints from the named publisher as a trigger for review.
Key dates
- December 5, 2025Event
- October 16, 2026Checked against sources
- October 18, 2026Checked against sources
- October 21, 2026Checked against sources
Developments are added when the record is reviewed. Next review: January 15, 2027.
Evidence
Each passage is quoted from its source. The quoted passages are re-checked against the live pages every month.
-
On December 5, The New York Times Company (the Times) filed a complaint for copyright and trademark infringement against Perplexity AI, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Supports: Parties, court, filing date and claims
The Times argued that Perplexity’s products generate fabricated information, or “hallucinations,” and falsely attribute them to the Times by displaying the newspaper’s registered trademarks alongside the false content.
Supports: Fabricated content attributed to the Times (trademark theory)
-
The paper also alleged Perplexity attributed fake information to users incorrectly attributed to the Times, phenomena known as “hallucinations,” in a violation of its trademark.
Supports: Corroborates hallucination allegation
Suggested citation. Eminence Scan, “New York Times v. Perplexity AI — Lawsuit Alleges Hallucinations Falsely Attributed to the Times”, Eminence Growth Solutions, last verified October 16, 2026, https://eminencegrowthsolutions.com/tools/eminence-scan/record/fail-046/.
Using our research: you may read and quote Eminence Scan with credit to “Eminence Scan, Eminence Growth Solutions” and a link; all other rights reserved. Terms: Using our research.
Spotted an error, or a development we have missed? Report a correction. How we check records: research methodology.