Anthropic’s landmark $1.5B copyright settlement is approved
The final approval settles one case, but it doesn't resolve the broader issue of using copyrighted works to train AI models.
Anthropic can finally start cutting checks to a group of authors and book publishers that sued the AI lab over copyright infringement. A federal judge gave final approval Monday of Anthropic’s landmark $1.5 billion settlement of a class action copyright lawsuit, Reuters reported .
Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a preliminary approval of the settlement last year, after ruling that Anthropic had illegally downloaded and stored millions of copyrighted books.
Alsup has since retired and Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin signed off on the settlement on Monday.
The payout will deliver $3,000 per work across an estimated 500,000 works, shared among the authors and publishers who hold rights to them. While the settlement is believed to be the largest in the history of U.S. copyright law, many authors and creators still don’t view it as a win.
That’s because of how the legal question was resolved. Alsup sided with Anthropic on the core issue. He ruled that training an AI model on copyrighted text counts as fair use — a decision widely seen as a turning point for the AI industry. But the ruling didn’t excuse how Anthropic obtained the books in the first place. Anthropic had built its training library from two sources: books it purchased and scanned (fine), and books it downloaded from pirate sites like Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror. Alsup found the second method illegal on its own terms and said that piracy question could go to trial; Anthropic agreed to a settlement soon after to avoid a trial and whatever damages a jury might have awarded.
While the final approval closes out this case, it doesn’t settle the legal question industry-wide because Alsup’s ruling was a single district court decision, and Anthropic’s decision to settle means the case will never reach an appeals court to become binding precedent.
Other judges are still free to reach their own conclusions on their own facts, which is exactly what’s playing out elsewhere. There is still a string of copyright lawsuits against companies such as Google, Meta, Midjourney, and OpenAI over whether it’s legal to train AI models on copyrighted works. Just last week, a group of publishers and authors, including Hachette, Cengage, Elsevier, author Scott Turow, and S.C.R.I.B.E. filed a class action lawsuit against Google over accusations that the company used their copyrighted works to train its AI platform, Gemini.
When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission . This doesn’t affect our editorial independence.
Scale faster. Grow your portfolio. Gain practical expertise. No matter your goal, Disrupt can empower you. Save up to $330 toda y!
Apple and Google ordered to purge ‘nudify’ apps from App Stores Lucas Ropek
Apple and Google ordered to purge ‘nudify’ apps from App Stores
Apple and Google ordered to purge ‘nudify’ apps from App Stores
Coca-Cola suspended production at its Fairlife dairy after a ransomware attack Zack Whittaker
Coca-Cola suspended production at its Fairlife dairy after a ransomware attack
Coca-Cola suspended production at its Fairlife dairy after a ransomware attack
Tesla driver in fatal Texas crash pressed accelerator 100%, NTSB confirms Sean O'Kane
Tesla driver in fatal Texas crash pressed accelerator 100%, NTSB confirms
Tesla driver in fatal Texas crash pressed accelerator 100%, NTSB confirms
Amid hardware legal battle, OpenAI releases a $230 keyboard for Codex Lucas Ropek
Amid hardware legal battle, OpenAI releases a $230 keyboard for Codex
Amid hardware legal battle, OpenAI releases a $230 keyboard for Codex
Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models Rebecca Bellan
Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models
Anthropic, Blackstone bet the next trillion-dollar AI business is implementation, not just models
OpenAI’s first hardware device is reportedly a screenless speaker that can move Lucas Ropek
OpenAI’s first hardware device is reportedly a screenless speaker that can move
OpenAI’s first hardware device is reportedly a screenless speaker that can move
Anthropic’s newest ad is creeping people out Lucas Ropek
Anthropic’s newest ad is creeping people out
Anthropic’s newest ad is creeping people out
Key takeaways
- Anthropic's decision may influence the need for a clear legal framework on copyright in Brazil.
- The fair use of protected texts may encourage similar practices in other companies, increasing litigation.
- The current situation highlights the fragility of practices regarding the use of protected content and the urgency for regulations.
Editorial analysis
The approval of Anthropic's $1.5 billion settlement marks a significant moment in the debate over copyright and the use of protected works to train AI models. For the Brazilian tech sector, this decision may serve as a wake-up call regarding the need for a clear legal framework that defines the boundaries of using protected content. The manner in which Anthropic obtained the books, particularly through piracy sites, highlights the fragility of current practices and the urgency for regulations that protect both creators and technological innovations.
Moreover, Judge Alsup's decision to consider training AI on copyrighted texts as fair use may have repercussions throughout the AI ecosystem. This could encourage other companies to adopt similar practices, potentially leading to an increase in litigation as authors and publishers seek to protect their rights. In Brazil, where copyright and technology legislation is still developing, it is crucial for lawmakers to consider the implications of this ruling when formulating new laws.
The conclusion of this case does not resolve the broader question of the legality of using protected works, meaning that further lawsuits will continue to emerge. The recent action against Google, for instance, indicates that the industry is still far from consensus. For Brazil, this suggests that content creators should remain vigilant about changes in international legislation and practices, as they may directly influence the local landscape and how AI technologies are developed and implemented.
Finally, the current situation demands ongoing vigilance. As more cases arise, it will be interesting to observe how different jurisdictions handle the intersection of copyright and technological innovation. Brazil, with its rich cultural production, should be prepared to engage in this global dialogue, ensuring that creators' rights are respected while promoting innovation in AI.
What this coverage includes
- Clear source attribution and link to the original publication.
- Editorial framing about relevance, impact, and likely next developments.
- Review for readability, context, and duplication before publication.
Original source:
TechCrunch AIAbout this article
This article was curated and published by AIDaily as part of our editorial coverage of artificial intelligence developments. The content is based on the original source cited below, enriched with editorial context and analysis. Automated tools may assist with translation and initial structuring, but publication decisions, factual review, and contextual framing remain editorial responsibilities.
Learn more about our editorial process