Anthropic to pay authors $1.5 billion to settle lawsuit over pirated books used to train AI chatbots

Anthropic logo is seen in this illustration created on May 20, 2024. (REUTERS/Illustration/File Photo)
Short Url
Updated 07 September 2025
Follow

Anthropic to pay authors $1.5 billion to settle lawsuit over pirated books used to train AI chatbots

  • The company has agreed to pay authors or publishers about $3,000 for each of an estimated 500,000 books covered by the settlement
  • Anthropic, founded by ex-OpenAI leaders in 2021, earlier this week put its value at $183 billion after raising another $13 billion in investments

NEW YORK: Artificial intelligence company Anthropic has agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit by book authors who say the company took pirated copies of their works to train its chatbot.
The landmark settlement, if approved by a judge as soon as Monday, could mark a turning point in legal battles between AI companies and the writers, visual artists and other creative professionals who accuse them of copyright infringement.
The company has agreed to pay authors or publishers about $3,000 for each of an estimated 500,000 books covered by the settlement.
“As best as we can tell, it’s the largest copyright recovery ever,” said Justin Nelson, a lawyer for the authors. “It is the first of its kind in the AI era.”
A trio of authors — thriller novelist Andrea Bartz and nonfiction writers Charles Graeber and Kirk Wallace Johnson — sued last year and now represent a broader group of writers and publishers whose books Anthropic downloaded to train its chatbot Claude.




Thriller novelist Andrea Bartz is photographed in her home, in the Brooklyn borough of New York, on Sept. 4, 2025 (AP)

A federal judge dealt the case a mixed ruling in June, finding that training AI chatbots on copyrighted books wasn’t illegal but that Anthropic wrongfully acquired millions of books through pirate websites.
If Anthropic had not settled, experts say losing the case after a scheduled December trial could have cost the San Francisco-based company even more money.
“We were looking at a strong possibility of multiple billions of dollars, enough to potentially cripple or even put Anthropic out of business,” said Thomas Long, a legal analyst for Wolters Kluwer.
US District Judge William Alsup of San Francisco has scheduled a Monday hearing to review the settlement terms.
Anthropic said in a statement Friday that the settlement, if approved, “will resolve the plaintiffs’ remaining legacy claims.”
“We remain committed to developing safe AI systems that help people and organizations extend their capabilities, advance scientific discovery, and solve complex problems,” said Aparna Sridhar, the company’s deputy general counsel.
As part of the settlement, the company has also agreed to destroy the original book files it downloaded.
Books are known to be important sources of data — in essence, billions of words carefully strung together — that are needed to build the AI large language models behind chatbots like Anthropic’s Claude and its chief rival, OpenAI’s ChatGPT.
Alsup’s June ruling found that Anthropic had downloaded more than 7 million digitized books that it “knew had been pirated.” It started with nearly 200,000 from an online library called Books3, assembled by AI researchers outside of OpenAI to match the vast collections on which ChatGPT was trained.
Debut thriller novel “The Lost Night” by Bartz, a lead plaintiff in the case, was among those found in the dataset.
Anthropic later took at least 5 million copies from the pirate website Library Genesis, or LibGen, and at least 2 million copies from the Pirate Library Mirror, Alsup wrote.
The Authors Guild told its thousands of members last month that it expected “damages will be minimally $750 per work and could be much higher” if Anthropic was found at trial to have willfully infringed their copyrights. The settlement’s higher award — approximately $3,000 per work — likely reflects a smaller pool of affected books, after taking out duplicates and those without copyright.
On Friday, Mary Rasenberger, CEO of the Authors Guild, called the settlement “an excellent result for authors, publishers, and rightsholders generally, sending a strong message to the AI industry that there are serious consequences when they pirate authors’ works to train their AI, robbing those least able to afford it.”
The Danish Rights Alliance, which successfully fought to take down one of those shadow libraries, said Friday that the settlement would be of little help to European writers and publishers whose works aren’t registered with the US Copyright Office.
“On the one hand, it’s comforting to see that compiling AI training datasets by downloading millions of books from known illegal file-sharing sites comes at a price,” said Thomas Heldrup, the group’s head of content protection and enforcement.
On the other hand, Heldrup said it fits a tech industry playbook to grow a business first and later pay a relatively small fine, compared to the size of the business, for breaking the rules.
“It is my understanding that these companies see a settlement like the Anthropic one as a price of conducting business in a fiercely competitive space,” Heldrup said.
The privately held Anthropic, founded by ex-OpenAI leaders in 2021, earlier this week put its value at $183 billion after raising another $13 billion in investments.
Anthropic also said it expects to make $5 billion in sales this year, but, like OpenAI and many other AI startups, it has never reported making a profit, relying instead on investors to back the high costs of developing AI technology for the expectation of future payoffs.
The settlement could influence other disputes, including an ongoing lawsuit by authors and newspapers against OpenAI and its business partner Microsoft, and cases against Metaand Midjourney. And just as the Anthropic settlement terms were filed, another group of authors sued Apple on Friday in the same San Francisco federal court.
“This indicates that maybe for other cases, it’s possible for creators and AI companies to reach settlements without having to essentially go for broke in court,” said Long, the legal analyst.
The industry, including Anthropic, had largely praised Alsup’s June ruling because he found that training AI systems on copyrighted works so chatbots can produce their own passages of text qualified as “fair use” under US copyright law because it was “quintessentially transformative.”
Comparing the AI model to “any reader aspiring to be a writer,” Alsup wrote that Anthropic “trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different.”
But documents disclosed in court showed Anthropic employees’ internal concerns about the legality of their use of pirate sites. The company later shifted its approach and hired Tom Turvey, the former Google executive in charge of Google Books, a searchable library of digitized books that successfully weathered years of copyright battles.
With his help, Anthropic began buying books in bulk, tearing off the bindings and scanning each page before feeding the digitized versions into its AI model, according to court documents. That was legal but didn’t undo the earlier piracy, according to the judge.
 


Keep it real: Tech giants urged to lead on safeguarding online privacy

Updated 09 December 2025
Follow

Keep it real: Tech giants urged to lead on safeguarding online privacy

  • AI, deepfakes, misinformation under scrutiny at Bridge Summit
  • Media, tech professionals discuss how to keep users safe

ABU DHABI: As AI-generated deepfakes and bots grow more sophisticated, online privacy and identity protection have become urgent global concerns, especially for journalists, influencers and media professionals, whose lives unfold in the digital spotlight.

The growing threats of impersonation, character assassination and coordinated online abuse was at the center of a high-stakes conversation on the second day of the Bridge Summit in Abu Dhabi, where regional and international leaders from the technology and media fields tackled the complex risks surrounding digital safety, security and trust in an AI-powered world.

Adeline Hulin, chief of unit, media and information literacy at UNESCO, highlighted the risks that many people, in particular children and women, are facing online. 

Although her work has long centered on promoting safe internet practices, she said that the onus of safeguarding online privacy and security rested primarily with technology companies — the only actors, she argued, capable of keeping pace with the rapid evolution of AI.

“It is going to be really important that instead of people constantly having to adapt to the technology, if the technology itself is more user-centric,” she told the summit.

“We can train people to recognize deepfakes, but technology can do that quicker.”

Major tech companies have come under fire in recent years for failing to tackle harassment and misinformation. This has led to a litany of legislation as governments try to gain control of a growing problem.

But some companies appear to be heeding the call. Erin Relford, senior privacy engineer at Google, said her company was working to embed privacy protections in the infrastructure level beneath the platform.

“We want to give consumers the choice of how much they can share data-wise,” she said.

“The biggest challenge is making sure you have the right people in the room to create these privacy protection platforms.”

Privacy enhancement technology would see several tools released that empowered users to understand how their data was being monetized and aggregated, Relford said.

Google had been working to change the parental controls and make it easier for users to understand their protection, she said, but admitted it was still difficult and more education was needed.

“Most of the power lies within the user. Consumers drive what is popular. In terms of organizations that protect your privacy, we want to encourage them and use their services rather than empowering websites that don’t,” she said.

Education is key 

Still, Relford argued that education was fundamental in rolling out privacy tools. Tech companies could only do so much if people did not increase their awareness online, she said.

“The better we educate people about privacy tools, the less harm we have from the ground up.”

Echoing similar sentiments, Hulin promoted the idea of including online literacy in school curricula. Even high-profile moves, like Australia’s recent headline-grabbing ban on under-16s using social media, would do little to reduce the risks without more education.

“Even if there is banning, it’s not going to change misinformation and disinformation. You still need to teach these kids about the information ecosystem,” she said.

“Parents need to be really interested in the news information that your children are consuming.”

Assel Mussagaliyeva-Tang, founder of Singapore-based startup EDUTech Future, said that the AI revolution demanded close collaboration between schools, universities and families to equip children with the skills to navigate new technologies safely and responsibly.

“We need to set up the guardrails and protection of the kids because they are not aware how the model will respond to their needs,” she said.

A UNESCO survey found that 62 percent of digital creators skip rigorous fact-checking, while a 2024 YouGov study showed only 27 percent of young adults feel confident about AI in education.

Mussagaliyeva-Tang said educators needed to focus on preparing and nurturing adults who were “ready for the world,” by integrating ethics, data literacy and critical thinking into curricula.

But she said that universities and the broader education system remained behind the curve in adapting to emerging technologies and equipping students with the skills needed for responsible digital engagement.

Likewise, tech companies needed to be transparent and inclusive in training their data in a way that represented different cultures, she said.

While global regulations on AI remain fragmented, Dr. Luca Iando, dean and distinguished chair at the Collins College of Professional Studies at St. John’s University, called on educational institutions to actively collaborate with technology platforms to help shape educational content and mitigate the potential harm of AI on children, especially as technologies continue to grow.

He warned of young people’s overreliance on AI and said that educators in the long term needed to focus on developing “durable, human skills” in students and transform the type of assignments and coursework to meet the new age of AI.

There needed to be guidelines for students on using AI responsibly, to prepare them for the workplace, he said.

Highlighting the skills gap between educational institutions and the modern workplace, Mussagaliyeva-Tang said: “Employers want professionals. They don’t have time and the budgets to retrain after the outdated curriculum of the university.”

The rise of AI demanded a rethinking of the true purpose of education to nurture individuals who strove to make a positive impact on a rapidly evolving world, she said.