{"id":51979,"date":"2026-05-21T14:00:03","date_gmt":"2026-05-21T18:00:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=51979"},"modified":"2026-05-21T14:00:03","modified_gmt":"2026-05-21T18:00:03","slug":"lawsuits-claim-openai-and-perplexity-shared-user-data-for-advertising","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2026\/05\/21\/lawsuits-claim-openai-and-perplexity-shared-user-data-for-advertising\/","title":{"rendered":"Lawsuits Claim OpenAI and Perplexity Shared User Data for Advertising"},"content":{"rendered":"

Madeline Batt<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

The lawsuit <\/em>targeted generative AI company Perplexity, along with Meta and Google, alleging they disclosed transcripts of users’ conversations with chatbots for targeted advertising. The case highlighted a burgeoning monetization strategy for the AI industry to solve generative AI’s profitability problem<\/a> with a function the technology has proven especially adept at<\/a>: collecting intimate information about users. Coming a few months after announcements from Meta<\/a> and OpenAI<\/a> that they would use data from AI products to target ads, the action and its voluntary dismissal leave the viability of legal challenges to ad-based monetization strategies unresolved.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Maggie Harrison Dupré<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

A new class action lawsuit accuses OpenAI of sharing data including user chat queries and personal identifying information like emails and user IDs with the tech giants — and targeted advertising behemoths — Meta and Google, without obtaining proper user consent.<\/p>\n

Filed yesterday in California, the lawsuit<\/a> claims that OpenAI’s data-sharing with Google and Meta violates the California Invasion of Privacy Act, known as CIPA<\/a>, as well as the Electronic Communications Privacy Act. It points specifically<\/a> to OpenAI’s integrations with Meta Pixel<\/a> and Google Analytics<\/a>, which are data-tracking and collection tools that facilitate targeted advertisements.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Via Nick Heer<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Interestingly, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada<\/a> recently concluded an investigation of OpenAI’s training on personal information and whether it can produce that information reliably. It seems to me like questions about third-party ad targeting were out of scope. This is notable, however:<\/p>\n

OpenAI represented that ‘untraining’ or ‘reverse-training’ LLMs, so that they no longer use or generate specific personal information for which a deletion request has been submitted, is not currently feasible.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

[…]<\/p>\n

It is not even clear OpenAI, for example, ensures data in its collection remains in compliance with opt-out requests when training new models.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n