Vannus / Catalog / Perplexity AI

Perplexity AI

Vannus has not established which model this vendor runs, and does not infer one. Every finding below is quoted to the vendor’s own document, or marked not disclosed where the vendor publishes nothing.

Determination
Contracts with Perplexity AI, Inc. (United States) — within reach of US legal process.
perplexity.ai · read 2026-08-08
read from terms of service · inferred from the address, not the heading

AI-powered research assistant that provides sourced answers with citations

research, search, writing
What the vendor's own documentation says
Sonar — Perplexity's grounded search model.
docs.perplexity.ai ↗ Vendor-sourcedQuote re-checked 14 Sep 2026
Who controls it
US corporate controlYes — a US parent or US contracting entity is on the public record
Contracting entityPerplexity AI, Inc.
Governing lawLaws of California. Mandatory good-faith negotiation first; failing that, disputes "adjudicated exclusively by the state and federal courts located in San Francisco County, California", with a carve-out allowing either party to seek injunctive relief in any court of competent jurisdiction. No arbitration clause and no region split.
Trains on your dataYes, unless you opt out — on the vendor's default plan
On a paid or enterprise planDoes not train on your data — no retention position stated

Applies to: Customers under Perplexity's Enterprise Terms of Service (Enterprise / Enterprise Pro)

From the enterprise terms of service: “Perplexity shall not use (or authorize third parties to use) Customer Content to train, retrain, fine-tune or otherwise improve any generative artificial intelligence models.” perplexity.ai ↗

Training and retention posture varies by plan. The default-plan row above describes the vendor’s free or standard tier; the paid-plan row is quoted from the document linked beside it. A negotiated contract can override either. Check your own agreement before relying on this.

This is a separate question from the grade above. The grade measures resilience — whether the tool endures and whether you could leave it. This describes who controls the vendor. A tool can score modestly on one and strongly on the other, and many do.

On U.S. CLOUD Act reach specifically: the statute reaches a provider subject to U.S. jurisdiction over data in its possession, custody or control. Corporate control is a strong indicator of that and it is what we can evidence from published documents — but it is not the whole test. A company founded outside the U.S. can still contract through a U.S. entity or run substantial U.S. operations. Treat this as a starting point for your own review, not a legal determination, and take advice on anything that matters.

Compliance the vendor states
SOC2

Taken from the vendor’s own published material. Vannus does not hold these reports and has not reviewed their scope or dates — ask the vendor for the current report before relying on any of them.

How this grade is set

Vannus publishes a nine-dimension trust framework — data sovereignty, training privacy, compliance posture, operational resilience, exit portability, and more. The heaviest criterion asks whether the tool builds its own AI or resells someone else's model; where the vendor discloses it, the grade cites the vendor's own documentation. No paid placements — scoring is walled off from affiliate revenue. See the methodology →

Related tools we grade
Visit Perplexity AI ↗ Grade your whole stack →