Publishers and author Scott Turow sue Google over Gemini AI copyright infringement
Major publishers and a prominent author have filed a lawsuit in New York accusing Google of using millions of copyrighted books to train its Gemini AI, escalating a legal battle that could reshape the economics of digital content.
Hachette Book Group, Cengage Learning, Elsevier, and bestselling author Scott Turow have filed a lawsuit in federal court in New York against Google. The plaintiffs accuse the tech giant of illegally using millions of copyrighted books to train its Gemini artificial intelligence models.
The complaint argues that Google repurposed works originally supplied for limited services like Google Books, Google Play Books, and Google Scholar. While these platforms were permitted to display searchable snippets or sell ebooks, the lawsuit claims the company crossed a legal line by copying the texts for commercial AI products without permission or payment.
The filing asserts that Google proceeded despite internal discussions acknowledging severe legal risks. According to the plaintiffs, the company internally flagged that it could face between $10 billion and $100 billion in potential fines for misusing texts provided by publishers. The suit states that Google abandoned its early motto of “Don’t be evil” to engage in “one of the most prolific infringements of copyrighted materials in history.”
Beyond the legal principle, the publishers warn of severe economic disruption to the literary market. The lawsuit highlights that Gemini could generate a 100-page murder mystery in 20 minutes for 39 cents, directly substituting for an original copyrighted work. The plaintiffs argue that no publisher or author can compete with such artificially deflated production costs.
Specific titles allegedly used without permission include N.K. Jemisin’s The Fifth Season and Lemony Snicket’s Who Could That Be at This Hour? The plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages, a permanent injunction against further infringement, and a court order forcing Google to destroy any unauthorised copies used in its training data.
This case intensifies a growing legal battle over generative AI and intellectual property. It follows a landmark settlement where Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to authors over similar claims, as well as a ruling last June where a judge favoured Meta in a separate copyright suit.
The current action stems from an earlier attempt by Hachette and Cengage to join a 2023 copyright lawsuit against Google, which the tech company successfully opposed. The legal escalation mirrors wider industry unrest, highlighted earlier this year when thousands of authors, including Kazuo Ishiguro and Richard Osman, published an empty book to protest unauthorised AI training.
Google did not respond to requests for comment regarding the allegations. The company has not publicly addressed the specific claims outlined in the complaint.
