New York Times and publishers file copyright claims against Brave

Publishers bring federal copyright claims against Brave

The New York Times has sued Brave, alleging that the privacy-focused browser company scraped the publisher’s copyrighted material and unlawfully distributed it to artificial intelligence companies. The lawsuit was filed on Monday in federal court in Manhattan, where the Daily News, Chicago Tribune and Orlando Sentinel filed a similar action the same day.

The Times names Anthropic, Perplexity, Mistral, xAI and Cohere as customers that allegedly received the material. It seeks an injunction and damages. Brave did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Founded in 2015, Brave is an 11-year-old browser company that has raised roughly $250 million, according to private-market trackers. The complaint describes the company as a supplier and distributor of copyrighted publisher content for AI businesses.

Allegations focus on web indexing and browser features

The Times alleges that Brave created an index of more than 30 billion webpages through an unidentified crawler. The suit says publishers were unable to block that crawler, an allegation that places control over access to web content at the centre of the dispute.

The complaint also targets a Brave browser feature that the Times says bypasses paywalls. It further challenges Brave’s practice of blocking publishers’ advertisements while selling its own advertising. Those claims broaden the case beyond the collection of pages to the browser’s handling of publisher content and revenue mechanisms.

The litigation adds to the Times’ existing legal disputes involving AI-related use of news content. The pattern is also visible in publisher claims over AI content use, where publishers pursued claims over the use of their material by major AI companies.

What the cases mean for AI procurement

The cases do not establish liability, but they underline the scrutiny facing the routes through which AI systems obtain web-derived material. The named companies, browser tools, crawlers and distribution arrangements are all relevant to the allegations made by the publishers.

For businesses evaluating AI providers, the practical implication is to examine content provenance, crawler and access controls, licensing terms, and the contractual allocation of risk before deploying services that may rely on publisher material.