Rolling Stone Publisher (Penske) Sued Google Over AI Overviews Feature

Mohsin Pirzada
⋅ 4 min read
449 Reads
Rolling Stone Publisher Penske Sues Google Over AI Overviews

Rolling Stone publisher Penske has filed a lawsuit against Google over its AI Overviews feature, alleging it harms publishers and misuses their content.

Penske Media Corporation, which publishes several leading media brands including Rolling Stone, The Hollywood Reporter, Billboard, and Variety, today filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that Google’s AI Overviews use their content in ways that diminish total traffic to its sites and harm the business’s affiliate income.

Background and Allegations

Reuters reported:

“News organizations have for months said the new features, including Google’s ‘AI Overviews,’ siphon traffic away from their sites, eroding advertising and subscription revenue.”

In its lawsuit, Penske says that approximately 20% of Google search results with links to its properties now contain AI Overviews and that the percentage is only increasing.

Penske additionally claims that from late 2024, dwindling traffic from Google searches led to a fall in revenue derived by affiliate links on its websites of over 33%. The complaint warns that:

“Siphoning and discouraging user traffic to PMC’s and other publishers’ websites in this manner will have profoundly harmful effects on the overall quality and quantity of the information accessible on the internet.”

Penske emphasizes its commitment to:

“We have a responsibility to proactively fight for the future of digital media and preserve its integrity – all of which is threatened by Google’s current actions.”

Legal Context and Previous Lawsuits

More detailed allegations are in the downloadable PDF of the full complaint. This case comes several weeks after Chegg sued Google in February over AI Overviews.

Spokesperson Jose Castaneda responded:

“With AI Overviews, people find Search more helpful and use it more, creating new opportunities for content to be discovered. We will defend against these meritless claims.”

It also received some public attention from Markham Erickson, Google’s Vice President of Government Affairs and Public Policy, on The Verge (hat tip @glenngabe):

“So, I don’t want to speak about the specifics of the lawsuit, but I can speak to our philosophy here, which is, look, we want a healthy ecosystem. The 10 blue links serve the ecosystem very well, and it was a simple value proposition. We provided links that directed users free of charge to billions of publications around the world. We’re not going to abandon that model. We think that there’s use for that model. It’s still an important part of the ecosystem.

But user preferences, and what users want, is also changing. So, instead of factual answers and 10 blue links, they’re increasingly wanting contextual answers and summaries. We want to be able to provide that, too, while at the same time, driving people back to content, valuable content, on the Internet. Where that valuable content is for users, is shifting. And so it’s a dynamic space. Ultimately, our goal is to ensure that we have an overall healthy ecosystem.”

Industry Impact

The lawsuit underscores increasing tension between archaic publishers and tech behemoths on the rise as AI powers innovation in content aggregation and search.

As AI-generated summaries become more common, finding the right mix of looking after user experience and publishers’ rights is difficult, if not impossible.

Bottom Line

Publishers, advertisers, and digital platforms will also be monitoring the legal battle, given that it could establish precedents that affect content monetization and traffic distributions in the AI era.

Read Full Bio
Mohsin Pirzada
Mohsin Pirzada is a freelance writer and editor with over 7 years of experience in SEO content writing, digital…