A new class action claims Perplexity's AI search app quietly piped users' chats to Meta and Google through hidden ad trackers — even when users chose its private "incognito" mode.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Perplexity AI, Inc., Meta Platforms, Inc., and Google LLC have not been found liable, there is no certified class, and there is nothing to claim at this time. The defendants dispute the claims. This page is general information, not legal advice.
What Is the Perplexity AI Lawsuit About?
Perplexity AI — the company behind the popular AI "answer engine" of the same name — is facing a proposed privacy class action alleging that it secretly embedded advertising trackers in its app and used them to forward users' private chats to Meta and Google. The case is Doe v. Perplexity AI, Inc., No. 3:26-cv-02803, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Meta Platforms, Inc. and Google LLC are named as co-defendants.According to the complaint, filed on March 31, 2026, Perplexity placed tracking tools directly in its code so that as soon as a user landed on the site, software allegedly began relaying the contents of their conversations — the questions they typed and the answers they received — to third parties for ad targeting. The named plaintiff, identified only as John Doe, a Utah resident, says he shared sensitive financial and tax information with the chatbot without realizing his conversations were allegedly being routed to advertising platforms. These are allegations the court has not ruled on, and the defendants dispute them.
What Trackers Are Alleged?
The complaint alleges that Perplexity embedded several well-known advertising and analytics trackers into its platform, including:• The Meta Pixel and Meta's Conversions API — tools advertisers use to measure and target Facebook and Instagram ads
• Google Ads and Google DoubleClick tags
Plaintiffs allege these tools captured users' prompts and the AI's responses, along with identifiers such as email addresses, IP addresses, and device information, and transmitted them to Meta and Google. The complaint frames this as interception of private communications that users reasonably expected would stay between them and the chatbot. Whether the trackers actually transmitted chat contents as alleged, and whether that violated any law, are questions the case will test.
The "Incognito Mode" Allegation
A central claim is that Perplexity's private or "incognito" browsing option did not actually keep conversations off the record. The complaint alleges that even when a user selected a private mode, the tracking software continued to send data to Meta and Google. In the plaintiff's telling, the feature people relied on to keep their searches confidential did not stop the underlying data flow. Perplexity has not been found to have done this, and the allegation remains unproven.What Does the Complaint Allege Legally?
The filing asserts that routing private chats to advertisers without consent amounts to unlawful interception and eavesdropping. Among the laws it invokes are:• The California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) — the state's anti-wiretapping and eavesdropping statute, which generally bars intercepting confidential communications without consent
• The federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act / Wiretap Act
• The California Comprehensive Computer Data Access and Fraud Act (CDAFA)
• California's Unfair Competition Law and the state constitutional right to privacy
In plain terms, plaintiffs argue that every user whose chat was allegedly relayed to Meta or Google without knowing consent may have had a private communication intercepted within the meaning of these laws. None of the defendants has been found to have violated any of them, and all dispute the claims.
Who Could Be Affected?
If the case proceeds, the proposed class could be large. It is described as U.S. users whose communications with Perplexity were allegedly transmitted to third parties without consent, covering both guest users and registered account holders. Reporting on the filing notes that Perplexity has roughly 20 million monthly active users in the United States, which gives a sense of the potential scale — though the exact class definition, time period, and which users are covered will be shaped as the litigation develops. No class has been certified.What Are Plaintiffs Seeking?
The complaint seeks statutory damages and court orders to stop the alleged practice. Under CIPA, statutory damages can reach $5,000 per violation, and the federal wiretap and electronic-communications statutes provide their own statutory damages — figures that can add up quickly across a large user base. Because the case is unresolved, no money is available now, and any recovery is uncertain unless and until plaintiffs prevail or a settlement is reached.How the Companies Have Responded
The defendants dispute the allegations. A Perplexity spokesperson said the company had not been served with a lawsuit matching the description and so could not verify its existence or claims. A Meta spokesperson pointed to the company's policies, which it says bar advertisers from sending Meta sensitive information through its tools. Google did not immediately respond to reporters' requests for comment when the suit was filed. As with any complaint, these are competing accounts that a court has not yet weighed.Where the Case Stands (June 2026)
The lawsuit is at an early stage. It was filed on March 31, 2026, in the San Francisco division of the Northern District of California and assigned case number 3:26-cv-02803. As of June 2026 there is no certified class, no settlement, and no claim form. The case is part of a broader wave of AI-and-privacy litigation testing whether long-standing wiretap and eavesdropping laws apply to modern AI products. It sits alongside the Google Gemini Gmail privacy class action and the consolidated Otter.ai AI-notetaker wiretap class action, both of which raise similar questions. We will update this page as the case develops.What Should You Do Now?
There is nothing to file at this stage — no settlement and no claim form exist. If you are concerned about how an AI app handles your conversations, you can review the privacy and tracking controls in your browser and on your accounts, and limit ad tracking at the device level. You can also keep your own notes about your use of the service. If you want legal advice, consult a privacy attorney licensed in your state; you can find one through your state bar association's lawyer referral service. OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news site, not a law firm, and does not provide legal advice or process claims.For related coverage, see our reporting on the $68M Google Assistant privacy settlement, which is paying claims now, and the Google Incognito private-browsing privacy case.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Perplexity AI privacy lawsuit about?
The class action Doe v. Perplexity AI, Inc. (N.D. Cal.) alleges Perplexity embedded advertising trackers — including the Meta Pixel, Meta's Conversions API, Google Ads and Google DoubleClick — in its AI search app, and that those trackers forwarded users' chat prompts and responses, along with identifiers like email and IP addresses, to Meta and Google without consent. Meta Platforms and Google are also named as defendants. These are unproven allegations; Perplexity has said it had not been served and could not verify the claims, and Meta has pointed to its policies barring advertisers from sending sensitive data.
Does this affect Perplexity's incognito mode?
The complaint alleges that Perplexity's incognito feature did not stop the tracking and that data was sent to Meta and Google even when a user chose a private mode. That is an allegation the court has not ruled on. If you are concerned, you can review the privacy and tracking controls in your browser and on your Perplexity account, and limit ad tracking at the device or browser level.
Is there a Perplexity settlement or claim form yet?
No. The case is at the complaint stage. There is no certified class, no settlement, and no claim form. There is nothing to file at this time. We will update this page if the case is certified or settles.
Who could be covered by the Perplexity class action?
The complaint is brought on behalf of a proposed class of U.S. users whose communications with Perplexity were allegedly transmitted to third parties without consent. The named plaintiff is identified only as John Doe, a Utah resident. The exact class definition and time period will be shaped as the case proceeds, and no class has been certified.
What are the plaintiffs seeking?
The complaint seeks statutory damages and court orders to stop the alleged practice. It invokes laws including the California Invasion of Privacy Act, which allows statutory damages of $5,000 per violation, and the federal wiretap and electronic-communications statutes. Because the case is unresolved, no money is available now and any recovery is uncertain unless and until plaintiffs prevail or a settlement is reached.
Sources
• Doe v. Perplexity AI, Inc., No. 3:26-cv-02803 (N.D. Cal.) — docket via Justia• Insurance Journal — coverage of the filing (Apr. 2, 2026)
• MediaPost / Local News Matters — reporting on the complaint and company responses
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
