Get the weekly research letter
Companies change their terms quietly. We read every version and catch what actually changed. One email a week on the changes that matter and what they mean. No account.
This analysis describes what Perplexity AI's agreement states, permits, or reserves. It does not constitute a legal determination about enforceability. Regulatory applicability and practical outcomes may vary by jurisdiction, enforcement context, and individual circumstances. Read our methodology
How other platforms handle this
This choice of jurisdiction does not prevent Cohere from seeking injunctive relief with respect to a violation of intellectual property rights or confidentiality obligations in any appropriate jurisdiction.
Any claim for injunctive relief with respect to a violation of section D.9 may be brought in any jurisdiction.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, either Party may seek injunctive relief in any court of appropriate jurisdiction with respect to any alleged breach of such Party's Intellectual Property Rights, breaches of Confidentiality...
Monitoring
Perplexity AI has changed this document before.
Receive same-day alerts, structured change summaries, and monitoring for up to 20 platforms.
"Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction for temporary or permanent injunctive relief without breach of this Section 11.1.Excerpt from Perplexity AI's Perplexity API Terms of Service
Provision-level monitoring, governance timelines, and regulatory mapping built from archived source documents and historical version tracking.
The clause states: “Notwithstanding the foregoing, the parties may apply to any court of competent jurisdiction for temporary or permanent injunctive relief without breach of this Section 11.1.”
ConductAtlas has identified this type of provision across 272 platforms. See the full comparison.
No. ConductAtlas is an independent monitoring service. We are not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by Perplexity AI.