Background: The Clash Between AI Search and Journalism
As generative AI-powered search services gain popularity, the unauthorized use of news articles has become a serious issue. AI search services collect information from the internet and provide users with AI-generated summaries. While more convenient than traditional keyword searches, these services have repeatedly used copyrighted content without permission.
Japan's Fair Trade Commission (FTC) has taken action on this matter. In October 2024, the FTC published a discussion paper titled "Competition in Generative AI" and launched an investigation into the generative AI market. In June 2025, the commission released an interim report highlighting concerns from an antitrust perspective.
Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association: Potential Antitrust Violations
In July 2024, the Japan Newspaper Publishers & Editors Association issued a statement regarding the unauthorized use of news content by generative AI. The primary concern is search-enhanced generation services (RAG: Retrieval-Augmented Generation).
The association pointed out that dominant search providers using articles without permission could constitute "abuse of superior bargaining position" under Japan's Antimonopoly Act. The FTC's 2023 report suggested that search operators providing significant traffic to news sites may hold a superior position, forming the basis for this argument.
Furthermore, the Agency for Cultural Affairs indicated in March 2024 that using databases without permission for AI training could constitute copyright infringement, especially when the database owner plans to commercialize it. The association emphasized that unauthorized use of articles in search-enhanced AI services likely violates current copyright law.
Wave of Lawsuits: Three Major Newspapers Sue Perplexity
Legal action has already begun. In August 2024, Yomiuri Shimbun Group sued U.S. AI search service "Perplexity" in Tokyo District Court, seeking approximately 2.17 billion yen in damages and an injunction against unauthorized use. According to Yomiuri's investigation, Perplexity allegedly acquired and copied 119,467 articles without permission between September 2023 and June 2024.
On August 26, Asahi Shimbun and Nikkei jointly sued Perplexity, requesting 2.2 billion yen each, totaling 4.4 billion yen in damages. Both companies claim that despite implementing "robots.txt" technical measures to refuse content usage, Perplexity ignored these and continued collecting their content.
The lawsuit alleges violations of copyright law's reproduction rights, adaptation rights, and public transmission rights, as well as unfair competition prevention law violations due to displaying false information.
FTC Investigation: Market Dominance and Competition Risks
The FTC's investigation analyzes the generative AI market across three layers: "Infrastructure," "Model," and "Application." Key concerns include "tying" and "access restriction/exclusion" by companies with strong existing market positions.
Specifically, companies with overwhelming search service market share integrating generative AI features could make it difficult for competitors' products to gain market adoption. Concerns also exist about companies with strong positions in specific fields—such as GPU manufacturers or smartphone OS providers—using that position to hinder new market entrants.
The June 2025 interim report noted that while no specific problematic cases have been identified currently, market foreclosure effects could constitute antitrust violations. The FTC plans to continue investigations and compile the next report by the end of fiscal year 2025.
International Movements: Regulatory Strengthening in Europe and America
This issue extends beyond Japan. In March 2024, France's Competition Authority fined Google 250 million euros (approximately 43 billion yen) for unauthorized use of media articles in AI development.
In the United States, the News Media Alliance (NMA) requested in May 2024 that the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission halt service expansion by certain generative AI providers allegedly misusing articles.
However, some movements involve paying for article usage rights. In May 2024, OpenAI announced a partnership with News Corporation, publisher of the Wall Street Journal, paying appropriate fees for AI training and summarization using their content.
Business Model Impact: The Zero-Click Search Threat
News organizations are particularly concerned about "zero-click searches." This phenomenon occurs when AI search services provide article summaries, eliminating users' need to visit original news sites.
News organizations rely on two revenue pillars: advertising and subscription income. However, if AI search provides the content, both revenue sources disappear simultaneously. The Newspaper Publishers Association warns that allowing such "free-riding" would diminish content reproduction, harming democracy and cultural development.
Cases have been reported where even paid subscriber-only articles were used in AI search responses. The situation where journalism requiring enormous time and effort is used en masse without compensation threatens the very foundation of news organizations.
Future Outlook: Balancing Innovation and Rights Protection
While generative AI has potential to bring new innovation to society, it also carries risks including copyright infringement and spread of misinformation. The FTC investigation aims to maintain fair competitive environments while ensuring sustainable generative AI development.
The FTC has opened a new "Generative AI Information Submission Form" to solicit broad information. The commission plans to analyze 712 submissions and approximately 50 interviews to formulate antimonopoly law perspectives.
In rapidly evolving AI markets, intervention after competition is hindered becomes too late. Therefore, the FTC is conducting investigations more quickly and flexibly than conventional market surveys.
Healthy generative AI development in Japan requires both copyright protection and fair competition assurance. The lawsuit outcomes and FTC investigation results will significantly influence future rule-making.
How is the use of news articles by AI search services viewed in your country? Please share your thoughts in the comments!
Reactions in Japan
I understand the newspapers' position, but AI search is too convenient to go back... But freeloading is wrong. They should pay licensing fees properly.
Good that the FTC is taking action. It's unhealthy for giant companies like GAFA to monopolize the market. We need to protect Japanese news organizations.
Ignoring robots.txt for crawling is too malicious. When technically refused but they force through, that's completely out of line.
But newspaper articles are just a collection of facts, right? I wonder how far copyright claims can go. If AI is just summarizing, I don't think it's a problem.
They say zero-click searches reduce newspaper revenue, but young people don't read newspapers anyway. Isn't this just the flow of times? They should change their business model.
It's unforgivable to use information reporters worked hard to gather for free. Reporting takes time and money. AI is convenient, but who will create the content?
They should partner and pay fair compensation like OpenAI does. They could build a win-win relationship, so I don't understand why they use content without permission.
6.6 billion yen lawsuit amount is incredible. But if they don't go this far, AI companies will take them lightly. Hope it serves as a deterrent.
Using even paid subscriber-only articles is terrible. It makes paying subscribers look like fools. This is clearly business interference.
France's 43 billion yen fine is strict. I hope Japan follows suit and responds more rigorously.
Depends on FTC investigation results, but too strict regulation could hinder AI industry development, so balance is difficult.
Displaying false information is also problematic. With AI accuracy still low, spreading lies under newspaper names becomes a credibility issue.
Since it's information published on the internet, being crawled is inevitable. If you don't like it, put it behind a paywall.
In this era, we need to think about coexisting with AI. Rather than confronting, we should brainstorm how to coexist.
The perspective of abuse of superior bargaining position under antitrust law is interesting. Seems applicable to Google monopolizing the search market.
The Newspaper Association's claim that declining journalism quality endangers democracy makes sense. We must protect journalism.
Only Perplexity is being sued, but aren't ChatGPT and Gemini doing the same thing? Seems to lack fairness.
Ultimately, the problem is that legal frameworks haven't caught up. Copyright law revision suited to the AI era is needed.
We're facing the same issue in America. The New York Times sued OpenAI too, so this is a global challenge. Japan's FTC initiative is noteworthy.
Europe has GDPR and the Digital Markets Act, but AI search regulation is still insufficient. Japan's lawsuits will set important precedents.
Singapore is trying to balance innovation emphasis with creator rights protection. Japan's approach is instructive.
UK media has similar concerns. AI companies should pay proper licensing fees. Using content for free is unfair.
France's fine on Google was the right decision. Technological progress is important, but shouldn't violate existing rights.
AI regulation debate is active in Korea too. However, too strict regulation could hinder AI industry growth. Careful balance is needed.
In Brazil, many people conveniently use AI search. But compensation for content creators should be fair.
Canadian newspapers also sued OpenAI. This is a global trend. AI companies should take legal responsibilities seriously.
Poland is discussing strengthening digital copyrights. New laws suited to the AI era are needed.
Mexico emphasizes access to AI technology. But copyright protection is equally important. Coexistence is the challenge.
Australia faces similar issues. The News Media Bargaining Code for Google and Facebook might be instructive.
Denmark is discussing journalism sustainability in the digital age. We need to find a coexistence model with AI.
In India, AI search helps with education and information access. However, a fair compensation system is necessary.
UAE is actively investing in AI technology. However, respecting intellectual property rights is also emphasized. Balance is key.
Many people in the Philippines are starting to use AI tools. But awareness of content creator rights protection needs to be raised.
In Switzerland, privacy and data protection are top priorities. AI search should be regulated by the same standards.
Israel has many AI companies with active technological innovation. But from an ethical AI perspective, copyright protection is an important issue.
Netherlands emphasizes fair competition in the digital economy. Japan's FTC investigation sets a good precedent.