Core Insights - Cristiano Ronaldo is transitioning from a football player to a capital investor, leveraging his brand and influence in various sectors, particularly technology and sports [1][3][21] - His investment in the AI startup Perplexity highlights a strategic move towards high-growth technology sectors, aiming to capitalize on the increasing relevance of AI in daily life [2][12][16] Group 1: Financial Achievements - Ronaldo's total annual income reached $260 million in 2024, with a projected personal wealth of $1.4 billion by 2025, making him the first billionaire in football history [1][5] - His brand "CR7" has expanded into various consumer products, contributing significantly to his wealth through partnerships and endorsements [4][5] Group 2: Investment Strategy - Ronaldo's investment strategy is characterized by a preference for high-growth sectors like AI and NFTs, contrasting with more conservative approaches taken by other athletes [9][20] - He has made significant investments in various companies, including a $40 million stake in the free football game "UFL" and a strategic investment in Perplexity AI [8][12] Group 3: Brand Expansion - The "CR7" brand encompasses a wide range of products, including clothing, hotels, and fitness centers, leveraging Ronaldo's global influence and social media presence [4][5] - His partnership with Perplexity AI includes the launch of an interactive section that allows fans to engage with his career, enhancing brand visibility and user engagement [15] Group 4: Market Trends - The AI sector is experiencing rapid growth, with Perplexity achieving a valuation of $20 billion within three years, indicating strong investor confidence and market potential [14] - Ronaldo's involvement in AI reflects a broader trend among celebrities investing in technology, aiming to diversify their portfolios and maintain relevance in a changing market landscape [17][20]

OpenAI and Perplexity are betting on AI-first browsing. Legacy browsers from Google and Mozilla still have clear strengths https://t.co/coh7JsIjY0 ...

Core Viewpoint - The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against the AI startup Perplexity, alleging repeated copyright violations and competitive practices that harm the publisher's brand [1][2]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Perplexity's AI-powered search engine retrieves and displays large portions of The Times' content, competing directly with the publisher [2]. - The suit also alleges that Perplexity has made up information and falsely attributed it to The Times, damaging the publisher's brand [2]. - The New York Times had previously contacted Perplexity multiple times over the past 18 months, requesting that it cease using its content until an agreement was reached [3]. Group 2: Industry Context - Perplexity's Head of Communication stated that publishers have historically sued new technology companies, suggesting that such lawsuits have not been successful in the past [4]. - The New York Times had signed its first licensing agreement for generative AI content use with Amazon in May, allowing the latter to utilize its content for AI training [5]. - Other companies, including Reddit and Japanese media firms Nikkei and Asahi Shimbun, have also filed lawsuits against Perplexity for unauthorized content use and copyright infringement [5][6]. Group 3: Impact on Credibility - The lawsuits from various publishers claim that Perplexity's AI-generated answers have provided inaccurate information attributed to their articles, which severely damages their credibility [6][7].

The New York Times is suing Perplexity for copyright infringement https://t.co/qLaiPZducB ...

Core Viewpoint - The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against AI search startup Perplexity for copyright infringement, marking its second legal action against an AI company, as part of a broader strategy by publishers to negotiate compensation for the use of their content in AI products [1][8]. Group 1: Lawsuit Details - The lawsuit claims that Perplexity provides commercial products that substitute for The Times without permission or remuneration [1]. - The Times alleges that Perplexity's retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) products generate responses that often reproduce original content verbatim or near-verbatim, including copyrighted works from The Times [4][6]. - The lawsuit seeks damages for the harm caused and aims to prevent Perplexity from using its content in the future [11]. Group 2: Industry Context - The lawsuit is part of a long-standing trend where publishers have historically sued new technology companies, from radio to social media, to protect their content [7]. - Other media outlets, including the Chicago Tribune, have also filed lawsuits against Perplexity, indicating a growing concern among publishers regarding AI's impact on original journalism [1][10]. - The Times has previously sent a cease and desist letter to Perplexity and has attempted to negotiate terms for content use over the past 18 months [7]. Group 3: Perplexity's Response and Initiatives - In response to compensation demands, Perplexity launched a Publishers' Program that shares ad revenue with participating outlets and introduced Comet Plus, which allocates 80% of its $5 monthly fee to publishers [2]. - Perplexity's head of communications stated that publishers have historically struggled to win legal battles against new technologies, suggesting a belief that the lawsuit may not succeed [7]. - The company has faced accusations from other outlets, including Wired and Forbes, regarding unethical content scraping practices [11]. Group 4: Broader Legal Landscape - The Times is also involved in ongoing litigation against OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming that they trained AI systems using its articles without compensation [8]. - A related case against Anthropic has set a precedent regarding fair use in AI training, highlighting the complexities of copyright law in the context of AI [9]. - The legal pressure on Perplexity is mounting, with multiple publishers and media companies pursuing similar claims against the startup [10]. Group 5: Potential for Collaboration - Despite the lawsuit, The Times has shown willingness to collaborate with AI firms that compensate for its content, having signed a multiyear deal with Amazon for content licensing [12]. - Other publishers have also engaged in licensing agreements with AI companies, indicating a potential path forward for monetizing content in the AI landscape [12].

对于人工智能公司，各媒体出版商采取了混合策略：既与部分公司达成合作及内容授权协议，也对另一 些公司提起诉讼，以就其内容的使用获取经济补偿。 《纽约时报》正以侵犯版权为由起诉生成式人工智能初创公司 Perplexity，进一步扩大了其对人工智能 公司的法律行动。《纽约时报》称，这些公司窃取其内容并借此牟利。 在诉讼中，《纽约时报》指控 Perplexity 非法抓取其内容，并将《纽约时报》的原创报道以 "逐字或近 乎逐字" 的文字回复形式重新包装后呈现给用户。该报还指控 Perplexity 在视频、播客和图片方面存在 侵权行为，同时指控其编造信息并虚假归因于《纽约时报》。 《纽约时报》还表示，Perplexity 旗下可浏览网页并为用户完成任务的 Comet 人工智能助手，会生成 《纽约时报》文章的详细摘要。 "Perplexity 侵犯了知识产权法为《纽约时报》富有表现力的原创新闻报道提供的保护。"《纽约时报》 在提交给纽约联邦法院的诉讼中表示。 该媒体公司正寻求损害赔偿和禁令救济，包括要求 Perplexity 从其产品中移除《纽约时报》的内容。 周四，《芝加哥论坛报》也以侵犯版权为由对 Perplexi ...

Core Points - The New York Times has filed a lawsuit against Perplexity for allegedly copying and distributing its copyrighted content without permission [1][2] - The lawsuit claims that Perplexity unlawfully scraped various forms of content from The Times, including stories, videos, and podcasts, to create responses to user queries [1] - Perplexity's outputs are said to be "identical or substantially similar" to The Times' original content, according to the complaint [1] Company Statements - A spokesperson for The Times emphasized the importance of ethical AI use and expressed strong objections to Perplexity's unlicensed use of their content [2] - The Times is committed to holding companies accountable that do not recognize the value of their work [2] - Perplexity has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding the lawsuit [2]

The New York Times is suing generative-AI startup Perplexity for copyright infringement, expanding its legal fight against artificial-intelligence companies https://t.co/tELYqtNSQN ...

Core Viewpoint - The New York Times has initiated a lawsuit against the startup Perplexity for copyright infringement, marking an escalation in its legal actions against generative AI companies that allegedly exploit its content for profit [1] Group 1 - The lawsuit reflects the growing tension between traditional media companies and generative AI firms over content usage rights [1] - The New York Times claims that generative AI companies are profiting from its content without permission, raising concerns about intellectual property rights in the digital age [1] - This legal action is part of a broader strategy by The New York Times to protect its content and revenue streams from unauthorized use by technology companies [1]

Group 1 - The lawsuit filed in federal court on Friday adds to over 40 existing legal disputes between copyright holders and A.I. companies [1]