Judge approves $1.5B Anthropic settlement over copyrighted books

A federal judge has approved a $1.5 billion settlement between AI company Anthropic and authors who accused the company of illegally using nearly half a million copyrighted books to train its Claude chatbot. The settlement will pay authors and publishers approximately $3,000 per book covered by the agreement, marking a significant legal precedent for AI companies’ use of copyrighted material in training data.

What you should know: U.S. District Judge William Alsup approved the settlement in San Francisco federal court after addressing concerns about fair distribution and author notification.
• The settlement covers existing books but does not apply to future works.
• Authors and publishers must submit claims forms to receive their portion of the settlement fund.
• Judge Alsup had previously ruled in June that training AI on copyrighted books wasn’t inherently illegal, but found that Anthropic wrongfully acquired millions of books through pirate websites.

Key concerns addressed: The judge’s primary worry centered on ensuring all eligible authors would be properly notified about the settlement to prevent anyone from being left out.
• Alsup was concerned about potential “back room” dealings between major industry groups like the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers that could pressure lesser-known authors.
• The parties submitted a Monday filing demonstrating they had established robust notification systems to reach all covered authors and publishers.
• A claims process was designed to ensure authors could either accept the settlement or opt out to preserve their legal rights.

What they’re saying: Bestselling thriller novelist Andrea Bartz, one of the original plaintiffs, strongly endorsed the settlement in a court declaration.
• “Together, authors and publishers are sending a message to AI companies: You are not above the law, and our intellectual property isn’t yours for the taking,” Bartz wrote.
• Attorneys for the authors stated they believe the settlement “respects existing contracts and is consistent with due process.”

The big picture: This settlement establishes important precedent for how AI companies must handle copyrighted content in their training datasets, potentially influencing future litigation against other major AI developers who have faced similar copyright infringement claims.