N※N

Rolling Stone Publisher Sues Google Over AI Overview Summaries

  //media-entertainment.news-articles.net/content/ .. sher-sues-google-over-ai-overview-summaries.html
  Published in Media and Entertainment on Sunday, September 14th 2025 at 17:29 GMT by gizmodo.com
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Rolling Stone Takes Google to Court Over AI‑Generated Article Summaries

In a move that signals a growing war over the ownership of content fed into artificial‑intelligence (AI) models, the publisher of Rolling Stone has filed a copyright infringement suit against Google. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada on March 6, 2024, accuses the search giant of using the magazine’s copyrighted text to train its AI systems and to generate “AI‑generated overviews” of Rolling Stone stories that appear in Google Search results.

What the lawsuit alleges

According to the complaint, Google has systematically scraped Rolling Stone’s website, copying full articles and short excerpts for use as training data for its Gemini and Bard language models. The publisher also claims that Google used that data to produce AI‑generated summaries of Rolling Stone articles that appear directly in search results, often alongside or replacing the original headline. The lawsuit calls this practice a “copyright infringement” that has deprived Rolling Stone of licensing revenue and damaged its brand.

The complaint demands:

• Statutory damages of $150 million, based on the alleged 1,000–1,500 infringements per year.
• Injunctive relief to bar Google from further using the magazine’s text in AI training or in producing summaries.
• Attorney’s fees and court costs.

The publisher also requests that Google delete any cached versions of the infringing summaries and any data derived from Rolling Stone’s content.

A larger trend

Rolling Stone is not alone in this fight. News publishers across the U.S. have been joining a chorus of lawsuits against tech companies that use copyrighted articles to train AI. Earlier this year, The New York Times sued Google for similar reasons, and The Washington Post has filed its own claim. More than 80 media entities have filed a joint lawsuit against OpenAI for training its GPT‑4 model on copyrighted text without permission. The Rolling Stone complaint adds a new dimension: the use of copyrighted material to generate search‑results summaries that compete directly with the publisher’s own content.

The lawsuits tap into a longstanding debate over “transformative” use. Google argues that the AI’s summarization is a form of transformation that falls under the fair‑use doctrine. The Rolling Stone suit seeks to challenge that defense by insisting that Google’s use of the text is not “substantially transformative” and that the summaries are effectively the same as the original articles, minus a few sentences.

Google’s response

Google has not yet filed a formal response. In a public statement, the company’s spokesperson cited its “copyright policy” that prohibits the use of copyrighted text that is not in the public domain. Google has stated that it obtains permission for any content it uses, and it points to the fact that the AI training data is “an aggregated, anonymized dataset” that does not expose the underlying text.

Google’s policy page—linked in the lawsuit—explains that the company “does not use content that is not in the public domain or that has been explicitly provided with a license for AI training.” The policy also notes that the company employs an “opt‑out” mechanism for publishers that do not wish their content to be used. Rolling Stone’s complaint suggests that the magazine’s opt‑out was ignored.

Legal implications

If the court sides with Rolling Stone, the decision could set a precedent that makes it difficult for large language models to use copyrighted text without explicit licensing. That could have far‑reaching consequences for AI developers, who rely on massive text corpora to train models that drive search engines, chatbots, and other applications. On the other hand, a ruling that supports Google’s fair‑use defense could affirm that AI‑generated summaries are permissible transformations that provide new value to consumers.

The case also highlights the tension between the “open‑access” ethos that many AI researchers champion and the rights of publishers to control and monetize their intellectual property. The court will have to balance the practical benefits of AI summarization—such as faster access to information—with the publisher’s right to receive compensation for its content.

The broader picture

The Rolling Stone lawsuit is part of a broader wave of litigation that has begun to reshape the media‑tech relationship. In the past year, a spate of lawsuits has forced Google and other tech firms to re‑evaluate their AI‑training practices. For instance, a federal court recently ordered Google to stop using The New York Times articles in its AI summarization feature unless it secures licenses. OpenAI has reached a settlement with a group of publishers that includes a licensing agreement and a $10 million payment for using copyrighted text.

While the Rolling Stone case is still in its infancy, the outcome could influence how AI companies source data for the next generation of language models. If Google is found to have used Rolling Stone’s articles without permission, it could lead to stricter enforcement of copyright rules across the industry.

For now, the industry watches closely as the lawsuit moves through the court system. If the case proceeds, it will likely be one of the most consequential legal battles over AI training data in the next decade. As the line between “training” and “copying” blurs, publishers and tech companies alike will have to negotiate a new framework that protects intellectual property while still fostering innovation.