The New York Times, along with a consortium of regional newspapers, has initiated legal action against Brave Software Inc., alleging that the company has been systematically scraping copyrighted news content from the internet and distributing it to leading artificial intelligence firms for training purposes. This lawsuit underscores the escalating tension between traditional news organizations and technology companies over the use of proprietary content in AI development.
According to the complaint, Brave Software has been acting as a “dealer” of unauthorized news content, facilitating its use by AI companies such as Anthropic, Perplexity, Mistral, xAI, and Cohere. The plaintiffs argue that Brave’s practices not only infringe upon their copyrights but also undermine the financial viability of journalism by diverting potential licensing revenues away from content creators.
This legal action follows a series of similar disputes between news organizations and tech companies. In July 2026, News Corp filed a countersuit against Brave Software, accusing it of “flagrant theft” for allegedly distributing and selling versions of articles from The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post to AI companies. News Corp sought an injunction and damages of up to $150,000 per infringement, emphasizing that Brave’s unauthorized “covert scraping” and resale of its copyrighted articles fell “nowhere near the bounds” of fair use.
Brave Software had previously sued News Corp in March 2025, seeking a court declaration that its indexing and summarizing of content from publications, including The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post, constituted fair use. Brave argued that its practices were essential for advancing generative AI technologies, which it described as “the most important innovation so far this century.” However, News Corp contended that Brave’s actions reflected a “blatant disregard” for the damage inflicted on the dissemination of information.
The current lawsuit by The New York Times and its co-plaintiffs highlights a broader industry concern regarding the unauthorized use of journalistic content by AI developers. Media companies are increasingly vigilant about protecting their intellectual property, especially as AI technologies become more prevalent and capable of generating human-like text based on vast datasets, often sourced from existing online content.
As the legal landscape evolves, this case could set significant precedents for how AI companies access and utilize copyrighted material. The outcome may influence future collaborations and licensing agreements between content creators and technology firms, shaping the balance between innovation in AI and the rights of original content producers.