Anthropic will pay $1.5 billion to resolve lawsuits filed by a group of authors accusing AI companies of illegally pirating their copyrighted books for training Claude AI Model. The settlement was announced on August 29, the parties to the litigation Filed The motion of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals shows that they have reached an agreement.
“This landmark settlement far outweighs any other known copyright recovery,” author’s attorney Justin Nelson told CNET. “It will provide meaningful compensation for work for each class and a precedent for requiring AI companies to pay copyright owners. This settlement sends a powerful message to both AI companies and creators that it is wrong to get copyright-protected works from these pirate sites.”
According to lawyers’ estimates, the settlement still requires approval from the court, which can be held at a hearing on Monday, September 8. The authors in the class may receive about $3,000 per pirated job. They expect the case will include at least 500,000 works, and anthropomorphism will pay an additional $3,000 for any material added to the case.
“In June, the District Court issued a landmark ruling on AI development and copyright laws, finding that Anthropic’s approach to training AI models constitutes a fair use. If approved, today’s settlement will resolve the plaintiff’s remaining estate claims,” Aparna Sridhar, “Anthropic sridhar,” Anthropic’s deputy consultant told CNET, please tell CNET. “We remain committed to developing secure AI systems to help people and organizations expand their capabilities, improve scientific discoveries and solve complex problems.”
The settlement is the latest update in a series of legal actions and rulings between AI companies and authors. Earlier this summer, U.S. District Court judges William Alsup ruled Human use of copyrighted materials is fairly used – This concept in copyright law allows people to use copyrighted content without the specific purpose of the right holder (such as education). The ruling is the first time the court supports AI companies and says it uses copyrighted materials with reasonable uses, although Alsup said this may not always be the case in the future.
Two days after human victory, Meta Win a similar case In reasonable use.
Read more: We are all copyright owners. Why You Need to Care for AI and Copyright
Alsup’s ruling also shows that humans systematically acquired and destroyed thousands of second-hand books to scan them into a private, digital library for AI training. It is this statement that is suggested to conduct a second-level, separate trial, that is, the human decision to evacuate the court.
In class action litigation, the terms of the settlement need to be reviewed and approved by the court. The solution means that two groups “avoid the cost, delays and uncertainties of the case”.
“Anthropomorphization can move on without becoming the first major AI platform to have one of the copyright cases trial,” said Mom. “The plaintiff will most likely get the benefits of any financial or non-financial settlement clause as soon as possible. If a lawsuit is filed through trial and appeal, it can last for two years or more.”
Don’t miss our unbiased technical content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET As the preferred source of Google.
Will the solution affect other copyright disputes?
Copyright cases like this highlight the tension between creators and AI developers. AI companies have been working on fair use exceptions because they eat up a lot of data to train their models and don’t want to pay or wait for permission. No legislation Guiding companies how to develop and train AI, such court cases are important to shape the future of products people use every day.
“The terms of this settlement could be a data point or benchmark for solutions in future negotiations and other AI copyright cases,” Mammen said. He added that each situation is different and needs to be weighed based on its merits, but it may still be impactful.
Watch the following: The hidden impact of the AI data center boom
There are still big questions about how to apply copyright law in the AI era. Like the way we see Alsup cited in the Meta case, each situation helps to establish precedents to guide the legal guardrails and green lights around the technology. The settlement will end this specific case, but it is not clear about the fundamental legal dilemma caused by AI.
“There is still this uncertainty in the law that can open the door to further litigation involving different plaintiffs and different defendants, with similar legal issues, but different facts,” Mom said.
For more information, please check it out Our guide to understanding copyright in the AI era.
