A prominent New York Times reporter, John Carreyrou, has filed a lawsuit against major AI companies including Google, xAI, OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta Platforms, and Perplexity. The suit, lodged in California federal court on December 22, 2025, claims these firms used pirated copies of copyrighted books to train their chatbots without permission.
Carreyrou, famous for his book “Bad Blood” that exposed the Theranos scandal, joined five other writers in accusing the companies of infringing on their intellectual property. This case marks the first time Elon Musk’s xAI faces such allegations, highlighting growing tensions between content creators and the AI sector.
Details of the Lawsuit
The complaint focuses on how these AI giants allegedly scraped and used entire books to build large language models. Plaintiffs argue that their works were fed into systems powering popular chatbots, all without consent or compensation.
Court documents reveal that the authors seek damages and an injunction to stop further use of their material. They point to specific instances where pirated versions appeared in training datasets, raising questions about ethical data sourcing in AI development.
This action comes amid a wave of similar disputes, but stands out for targeting a broad range of defendants in one filing.
Experts note that proving direct infringement could hinge on evidence of how models retain and reproduce copyrighted content.
Who is John Carreyrou?
John Carreyrou gained worldwide recognition for his investigative journalism on Theranos, the failed blood-testing company led by Elizabeth Holmes. His 2018 book “Bad Blood” detailed the fraud and became a bestseller, later inspiring a Hulu series.
As a Pulitzer Prize winner, Carreyrou has built a career exposing corporate misconduct. His involvement in this lawsuit underscores his commitment to protecting creative works from exploitation.
Beyond “Bad Blood,” Carreyrou has contributed to major stories on healthcare and technology, often challenging powerful entities.
This suit aligns with his history of holding tech innovators accountable, now turning his focus to AI’s impact on authors.
Broader Impact on AI Industry
The lawsuit could reshape how AI companies approach data training. With AI models relying on vast amounts of text, questions about fair use and copyright have intensified.
Industry analysts predict that a win for the plaintiffs might force firms to license content or face hefty fines. Recent data from 2025 shows over 40 ongoing copyright cases against AI developers, signaling a pivotal moment.
For users, this means potential changes in chatbot accuracy and features if training data becomes restricted.
Regulators in the US and EU are watching closely, with new guidelines expected in 2026 that could mandate transparent data practices.
- Key defendants: xAI (Elon Musk’s venture), OpenAI (behind ChatGPT), Google, Anthropic, Meta, and Perplexity.
- Core allegation: Unauthorized use of pirated books in AI training.
- Potential outcomes: Financial penalties and mandatory content removal from models.
Similar Cases and Trends
Authors and publishers have ramped up legal challenges against AI in recent years. For instance, The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in 2024 over similar issues, seeking billions in damages.
In another development, music labels filed suits in 2025 against AI firms for using song lyrics without permission, expanding the battle to other creative fields.
| Case | Plaintiffs | Defendants | Year Filed | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York Times v. OpenAI | New York Times | OpenAI, Microsoft | 2024 | Ongoing |
| Music Labels v. AI Firms | Various labels | Multiple AI companies | 2025 | In discovery |
| Carreyrou et al. v. AI Giants | John Carreyrou and others | xAI, Google, etc. | 2025 | Newly filed |
| Authors Guild v. Google | Authors Guild | 2015 (related) | Settled |
These cases reflect a trend where creators demand fair pay for their contributions to AI advancements.
Logical reasoning suggests that without clear rules, innovation might slow as companies navigate legal risks.
Public Reactions and Future Outlook
Social media buzzed with support for the authors, as posts on platforms like X highlighted concerns over AI’s unchecked growth. Many users praised Carreyrou for taking a stand, while some defended AI firms as drivers of progress.
Industry insiders speculate that settlements could lead to new licensing models, similar to how streaming services pay for music.
As the case unfolds, it may influence global policies on AI ethics.
Share your thoughts on this lawsuit in the comments below, and spread the word by sharing this article with friends interested in tech and copyright issues.
