Full story
Publishers Sue Google
Three publishers and author Scott Turow filed a class-action lawsuit against Google in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging the company broke copyright law by using their works to train its Gemini AI.
The complaint alleges that Google "reproduced millions of copyrighted works without permission, without providing any compensation to authors or publishers," and it also claims Google "stripped CMI from the copyrighted works it stole to conceal its training sources."
The suit argues Gemini can enable and encourage copycat works without credit or compensation, and it says Google failed to implement effective guardrails despite knowing that outputs could substitute for copyrighted works.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and statutory damages, and they argue the infringement displaces legitimate book and journal sales while undermining the market for content licensing.
The lawsuit is part of a broader wave of AI copyright fights, including a parallel class-action targeting Meta over its Llama model training filed on May 5 by a similar group of plaintiffs.
What the Suit Says
The publishers’ allegations include that Google trained Gemini on books and articles from Google Books, Google Play Books, and “known pirate sources,” and the suit also points to internal discussions projecting potential fines.
In the complaint, the plaintiffs say Google flagged internally that it could face "$10Bs-$100Bs in potential fines" for using texts provided by publishers for Google Play Books.
Gizmodo reports the lawsuit seeks class action status and quotes the complaint’s claim that Gemini creates an AI system that competes directly with publishers’ works, including “a 100-page murder mystery” in 20 minutes “for a mere $0.39.”
The Guardian adds that the case is filed in federal court in New York and describes it as “one of the most prolific infringements of copyrighted materials in history,” while naming NK Jemisin’s The Fifth Season and Lemony Snicket’s Who Could That Be at This Hour? among the works the plaintiffs allege were used without permission.
The suit also argues Google’s actions are harming authors and the wider publishing industry by enabling AI-generated substitutes that could negatively impact book sales.
Relief Sought and Stakes
Beyond damages, the plaintiffs are seeking a permanent injunction preventing Google from continuing the alleged infringement and a court order requiring the company to destroy any unauthorised copies of their works used in training its AI systems.
“a court order requiring the company to destroy any unauthorised copies of their works”
The Guardian says the plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages, a permanent injunction, and an order requiring destruction of unauthorised copies, and it also notes Google did not respond to a Guardian request for comment.
Publishers Weekly reports the suit charges Google’s ongoing infringement is causing “substantial and irreparable harm to Plaintiffs and the Class” by displacing legitimate sales and facilitating the creation of substitute works that can be sold for much less than the original works.
PhonAndroid reports that Google has banned advertisements for ebooks on its platform to combat piracy, but it says publishers suing it argue the ban blocked only legitimate sellers while pirates continued to run ads, and it cites that the company would have threatened to stop reviewing alerts for six months.
In parallel, the broader legal and licensing landscape is shifting, with ActuaLitté describing the Association of American Publishers’ January 15, 2026 announcement that Cengage Group and Hachette Book Group filed a motion to intervene in In re Google Generative AI Copyright Litigation.
