Anthropic judge rejects $1.5B AI copyright settlement

I'm an author, and I've confirmed that 3 of my books are in the 500K dataset.

Thus, I stand to receive about $9,000 as a result of this settlement.

I think that's fair, considering that two of those books received advances under $20K and never earned out. Also, while I'm sure that Anthropic has benefited from training its models on this dataset, that doesn't necessarily mean that those models are a lasting asset.

How is it fair? Do you expect 9,000 from Google, Meta, OpenAI, and everyone else? Were your books imitated by AI?

Infringement was supposed to imply substantial similarity. Now it is supposed to mean statistical similarity?

You've misunderstood the case.

The suit isn't about Anthropic training its models using copyrighted materials. Courts have generally found that to be legal.

The suit is about Anthropic procuring those materials from a pirated dataset.

The infringement, in other words, happened at the time of procurement, not at the time of training.

If it had procured them from a legitimate source (e.g. licensed them from publishers) then the suit wouldn't be happening.

Do foundation model companies need to license these books or simply purchase them going forward?