Aravind Srinivas

Online, Aravind Srinivas displays swagger. In person, the 30-year-old has the demeanor of a man not used to being the center of attention. Sitting down for an interview in May, the CEO of the AI “answer engine” Perplexity is told that his potential inclusion in the TIME100 AI was not yet final and the decision could still change in the months ahead. “OK,” he says. “So as long as I don’t f-ck up…”

By then, Perplexity had already drawn the ire of online publishers for its business model: using AI to answer users’ questions by summarizing websites, diverting ad revenue from those sites. In June, the company launched a new feature called “Perplexity Pages,” that creates AI-generated reports in response to users’ queries. The feature appeared to have plagiarized sections of reporting from multiple publications, while barely or inaccurately citing its sources.

One of these AI-generated articles contained very similar wording and imagery to a Forbes article about former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, at times lifting word-for-word from the original article. When Forbes confronted Perplexity about ripping off its reporting, Srinivas issued a non-apology. Perplexity Pages had some “rough edges,” he said, thanking Forbes for raising the issue.

In the days following, Forbes sent Perplexity a cease and desist letter. Other media brands, including Condé Nast, which also accused Perplexity of plagiarism, have followed suit.

In the wake of these incidents, Perplexity is now highlighting its sources more prominently. “We've always cared deeply about attribution and citations in our product, and appreciate the feedback on how we can continue to refine it,” a spokesperson told TIME. 

Perplexity’s underlying business strategy remains unchanged. Srinivas sees Perplexity as a disruptor, and the target of this disruption, he says, is not the media but Google. The tech giant, he argues, is disincentivized from integrating AI into its search engine because it already has such a profitable ad-targeting business. It doesn’t want to replace that model with the lower-margin profits of AI search. That presents an opening for search driven by AI (like Perplexity).  

The disruption appears to be underway. Google has built AI into its search engine. In May, it launched an experimental “AI Overviews” feature, which initially backfired, telling some users that it was safe for them to eat rocks. Google ironed out those early flaws, and still has a more than 90% share of the search market. Still, Perplexity is growing fast, with around “tens of millions” of users making some 230 million queries per month, according to a company spokesperson.

Part of that growth includes cutting publishers into a pilot-revenue sharing program. Srinivas shared early plans for publishers to share a portion of the revenue Perplexity earns from its searches. “Our plan is to make sure that we share that with the publishers we frequently cite,” he said in May. “I could say 75% of it is for me, and 25% is for people I cite, five citations, 5% each. So every query [on which] I make money, you're also making money.” (TIME joined the program in July. A company spokesperson declined to disclose the terms of the partnership, citing a confidentiality agreement.)

For publishers, this promises a new revenue stream; although it is not yet clear whether deals like the one with Perplexity can replace potential advertising losses driven by the introduction of AI to search. “The ultimate purpose for you is to make sure what you wrote has reached people,” Srinivas told me in May, “And that’s what you get with [our] citations model.” 

“So every time [a user] consumes an answer, and your content makes it to the answer, it’s almost like you get a brownie point for that,” he said.