Penske Media, the owner of prestigious titles like Rolling Stone, Billboard, and Variety, has filed a lawsuit against Google, alleging the tech giant’s AI search features unlawfully use its journalism. The suit, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., claims that Google’s “AI Overviews” repurpose content from publishers without consent, significantly reducing traffic to their websites. This marks the first time a major U.S. publisher has taken Google to court over this specific AI feature, which places summarized answers at the top of search results.
The lawsuit argues that Google’s dominance in search, estimated at a near 90% market share, allows it to impose unfair terms. Penske alleges that Google only includes publishers’ websites in its search results if it can also use their articles to train its AI systems and generate these summaries. This practice, the company states, strips publishers of their leverage and avoids the need for Google to pay for the content it repurposes. Penske CEO Jay Penske stated the suit is a fight to “preserve the integrity” of digital media, which is threatened by Google’s actions.
The financial impact on publishers is presented as severe. Penske reported that about 20% of Google searches linking to its sites now show AI Overviews, a figure it expects to grow. This has led to a significant decline in search traffic, resulting in a more than one-third drop in affiliate revenue from its peak by the end of 2024. The suit echoes concerns from other content creators, including online education company Chegg, which filed a similar lawsuit in February alleging that AI overviews erode demand for original content.
In response to the lawsuit, Google defended its AI Overviews, stating they provide a better user experience and actually send traffic to a wider variety of websites. Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said, “With AI Overviews, people find Search more helpful and use it more, creating new opportunities for content to be discovered. We will defend against these meritless claims.” The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for the relationship between AI platforms and content creators.
