Penske Media Sues Google Over “AI Overviews,” Claiming It Uses Journalism Without Consent and Destroys Traffic
Rolling Stone, Billboard and Variety owner alleges Google’s AI summaries cut traffic and affiliate revenues by over a third and forces publisher consent under duress
Penske Media Corporation, publisher of Rolling Stone, Billboard and Variety, has filed a lawsuit in a U.S. federal court in Washington, D.C., accusing Google of using its journalistic content without permission via the “AI Overviews” feature and harming its revenue and site traffic.
The complaint contends that Google generates AI-summaries from Penske’s articles which appear at the top of search results, without Penske’s agreement, causing more than a one-third drop in affiliate advertising revenue since its peak in late 2024.
Penske further alleges that Google requires publishers to allow such use of their content in summaries if they want to be included in search result listings at all, presenting publishers with a coercive choice.
The lawsuit claims Google holds approximately ninety percent of the U.S. search market and uses that dominance to impose terms unfavorable to publishers.
Penske argues that Google’s practice of putting AI Overviews above traditional search links diverts users away from publisher websites, reducing clicks and diminishing both advertising and subscription income.
The complaint says about twenty percent of Google searches that formerly directed traffic to Penske-owned sites now display AI summaries instead — a proportion that is growing.
Google has defended the feature, stating that AI Overviews improve the user search experience and assist with content discovery.
Google also asserts that the summaries link back to source sites and that the company will vigorously defend itself against Penske’s claims.
This lawsuit marks the first time a major U.S. publishing group has taken legal action against Google specifically over the “AI Overviews” summaries.
It joins earlier lawsuits and antitrust complaints over similar issues: Chegg sued Google in February 2025 alleging AI Overviews damaged its original content and revenue; in Europe, independent publishers filed a complaint with the European Commission on similar grounds.
Those European complaints also argue that publishers are unable to opt out of having their content used for summaries without losing visibility in Google’s search results.
Penske is seeking both monetary damages for lost revenue and a permanent injunction against Google’s current use of its journalism in AI Overviews.
The case underscores growing tensions between large technology platforms and content creators over how artificial intelligence reshapes incentives in digital publishing, legal rights to content, and the economic sustainability of journalism.
The complaint contends that Google generates AI-summaries from Penske’s articles which appear at the top of search results, without Penske’s agreement, causing more than a one-third drop in affiliate advertising revenue since its peak in late 2024.
Penske further alleges that Google requires publishers to allow such use of their content in summaries if they want to be included in search result listings at all, presenting publishers with a coercive choice.
The lawsuit claims Google holds approximately ninety percent of the U.S. search market and uses that dominance to impose terms unfavorable to publishers.
Penske argues that Google’s practice of putting AI Overviews above traditional search links diverts users away from publisher websites, reducing clicks and diminishing both advertising and subscription income.
The complaint says about twenty percent of Google searches that formerly directed traffic to Penske-owned sites now display AI summaries instead — a proportion that is growing.
Google has defended the feature, stating that AI Overviews improve the user search experience and assist with content discovery.
Google also asserts that the summaries link back to source sites and that the company will vigorously defend itself against Penske’s claims.
This lawsuit marks the first time a major U.S. publishing group has taken legal action against Google specifically over the “AI Overviews” summaries.
It joins earlier lawsuits and antitrust complaints over similar issues: Chegg sued Google in February 2025 alleging AI Overviews damaged its original content and revenue; in Europe, independent publishers filed a complaint with the European Commission on similar grounds.
Those European complaints also argue that publishers are unable to opt out of having their content used for summaries without losing visibility in Google’s search results.
Penske is seeking both monetary damages for lost revenue and a permanent injunction against Google’s current use of its journalism in AI Overviews.
The case underscores growing tensions between large technology platforms and content creators over how artificial intelligence reshapes incentives in digital publishing, legal rights to content, and the economic sustainability of journalism.
