Artificial intelligence startup Anthropic has reached a $1.5 billion settlement with book authors who accused the company of taking pirated works to train its chatbot, Claude. If approved, the payout will be the largest copyright recovery ever reported in the US.<\/p>\n
The lawsuit, filed last year by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson, accused Anthropic of pulling vast quantities of copyrighted works from so-called \u201cshadow libraries\u201d like Library Genesis, Books3, and other pirate databases. Under the agreement, Anthropic will pay approximately $3,000 per book and destroy the data it obtained from shadow libraries.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis settlement sends a powerful message to AI companies and creators alike that taking copyrighted works from these pirate websites is wrong,\u201d said Justin Nelson, an attorney for the plaintiffs, in a statement to CNBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n In June, US District Judge William Alsup issued a mixed ruling<\/a>. He found that using copyrighted material to train AI models was \u201cfair use.\u201d However, the judge also determined that Anthropic\u2019s method of acquiring the books \u2014 knowingly taking them from pirate sites \u2014 was illegal. This ruling set the stage for a high-stakes trial scheduled for December.<\/p>\n Facing potential damages that experts said could have reached billions and threatened the company\u2019s future, Anthropic chose to settle.<\/p>\n For writers, the agreement is being hailed as a victory. Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, called it \u201can excellent result for authors, publishers, and rights holders generally, sending a strong message to the AI industry that there are serious consequences when they pirate authors\u2019 works,\u201d as quoted by The Associated Press<\/a>.<\/p>\n Anthropic\u2019s settlement could ripple through an industry already facing dozens of copyright lawsuits. Competitors like OpenAI, Midjourney, and Meta have also been accused of misusing creative works<\/a>. Some firms have chosen to avoid legal battles by striking licensing deals with publishers and media groups.<\/p>\n In a statement, an Anthropic spokesperson said, \u201cToday\u2019s settlement, if approved, will resolve the plaintiffs\u2019 remaining legacy claims. We remain committed to developing safe A.I. systems that help people and organizations extend their capabilities, advance scientific discovery and solve complex problems.\u201d<\/p>\n The proposed settlement still requires approval from Judge Alsup. If confirmed, the deal will close one of the most closely watched copyright disputes in the AI era.<\/p>\n But Anthropic\u2019s legal troubles aren\u2019t over. The company continues to face claims from music publishers and the social media platform Reddit, both accusing it of using their copyrighted material without permission.<\/p>\n Anthropic, founded in 2021 by former OpenAI executives, has grown rapidly and <\/strong>was recently valued at $183 billion<\/strong><\/a> after raising $13 billion in funding. The company expects $5 billion in revenue this year, though it has yet to turn a profit.<\/strong><\/p>\n The post Anthropic Agrees to $1.5B Settlement in Authors\u2019 Copyright Case<\/a> appeared first on eWEEK<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Artificial intelligence startup Anthropic has reached a $1.5 billion settlement with book authors who accused the company of taking pirated works to train its chatbot, Claude. If approved, the payout will be the largest copyright recovery ever reported in the US. The lawsuit, filed last year by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4711","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4711"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4711"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4711\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4711"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4711"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cybersecurityinfocus.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4711"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Reactions from authors and industry<\/h2>\n