Perplexity AI CEO Sputters When Asked to Define “Plagiarism” Onstage

This ain’t rocket science, dude.

Easy Definition

Merriam-Webster defines “plagiarism” as “to steal and cross off (the concepts or phrases of one other) as one’s personal” — however apparently that definition has perplexed the CEO of a buzzy AI search startup.

As TechCrunch reports, Perplexity chief government Arvind Srinivas appeared speechless when requested to outline plagiarism — which is telling, contemplating that Perplexity has repeatedly been accused of it in recent months.

In the course of the TechCrunch-hosted Disrupt 2024 conference, Srinivas struggled to summon a response when journalist Devin Coldewey requested him how the corporate defines the time period. He regarded round and sighed as a number of viewers members began laughing.

“Nicely you could have one!” the reporter mentioned. “I am curious — it’s important to have one so you do not do it accidentally.”

“You’ll be able to ask Perplexity this, really,” Srinivas mentioned awkwardly, prompting his interviewer to retort, “I believed I used to be!”

The CEO went on to say that he is extra within the precise definition of the time period, earlier than saying that Perplexity “at all times cites its sources” and would not make any possession claims to the content material it exhibits customers.

That assertion runs counter to the numerous information shops which have alleged the other — together with the New York Instances, which sent Perplexity a cease and desist letter earlier this month demanding that the agency cease utilizing its journalists’ work.

Although he tried to expound, the CEO’s continued clarification left loads to be desired.

“It’s surfacing content material from the online, summarizing it in a fashion that the consumer can digest,” Srinivas advised journalist Devin Coldewey, “after which offers all this info — precisely how journalists do their job, or lecturers do their job, or college students.”

Fightin’ Phrases

Extremely, that non-answer is someway higher than Perplexity’s printed work on the query of the way it defines plagiarism.

Final week, Srinivas wrote in a company blog post responding to NewsCorp’s plagiarism lawsuit alleging it ripped off the New York Put up and Wall Avenue Journal that publishers merely need his firm useless.

“The frequent theme betrayed by these complaints collectively is that they need this expertise didn’t exist,” the CEO wrote. “They like to stay in a world the place publicly reported details are owned by firms, and nobody can do something with these publicly reported details with out paying a toll.”

As TechCrunch notes, that put up failed to deal with information publishers’ salient considerations about Perplexity and others prefer it: that deploying different peoples’ work on a large scale and citing the unique creators as footnotes is not correct quotation in any respect, and may very well be thought-about an unlawful use of propriety content material.

By comparability, Srinivas sputtering on stage is definitely preferable to that brash weblog put up — however on the finish of the day, each messages obfuscate the guts of the matter.

Extra on AI plagiarism: OpenAI Whistleblower Disgusted That His Job Was to Vacuum Up Copyrighted Data to Train Its Models