Why is Anthropic destroying books?; The Guardian, August 5, 2026

Kathryn James, The Guardian; Why is Anthropic destroying books?

"Should we be surprised that destroying printed texts seemed easier to Anthropic than working with their human authors?"

Authors weigh in on $1.5 billion Anthropic AI copyright settlement; WGCU, August 3, 2026

Mike Kiniry, WGCU ; Authors weigh in on $1.5 billion Anthropic AI copyright settlement

"As Generative AI language models have entered the scene in recent years, a wave of copyright lawsuits has arisen in response, brought by authors and publishers. These lawsuits hinge on whether downloading and ingesting millions of copyrighted books without explicit permission to train Large Language Models constitutes copyright infringement or is protected as fair use.

Authors and publishers argue that it is infringement — particularly when AI developers illegally pirate or copy their books to help train their language models. AI companies argue that reading and learning from text is transformative and therefore falls under fair use.

In one class action lawsuit that was recently settled, the AI Company Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion dollars in a landmark copyright infringement settlement. It's one of the biggest in U.S. history.

There are other similar high-profile cases, including one by publishing houses including Hachette, Macmillan, and McGraw Hill, along with bestselling novelist and former President of the Author's Guild Scott Turow against Meta and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg and another against Google. Those cases are ongoing.

The Anthropic settlement means payments of roughly $3,100 to the authors and publishers of nearly half a million books, including our guests. We have a conversation about that settlement, and other pending cases, and what this all means for the publishing world.

Guests:

Marty Ambrose-McLaughlin is an award-winning author and English instructor at Florida Southwestern State College
Scott Turow is a writer and former attorney. He is the author of fourteen works of fiction, including Presumed Innocent and his most recent, Presumed Guilty which was published in 2025."

Authors have mixed feelings about the $1.5B Anthropic copyright infringement ruling; NPR, July 27, 2026

 Chloe Veltman , NPR; Authors have mixed feelings about the $1.5B Anthropic copyright infringement ruling

"Graeber is among the more than 300,000 writers involved in the suit who may soon be getting a modest windfall. A federal judge in San Francisco rubber stamped a $1.5 billion settlement in July resulting from a landmark class action lawsuit the authors brought against the AI company Anthropic two years ago...

AI companies often invoke the fair use doctrine – which enables the use of copyrighted works without the copyright holder's consent in some situations – as they try to make the case in court for training their models on these materials...

Chinese AI companies often use a technique to build their models called "AI distillation." This involves feeding their models the outputs generated by other AI models, often high-quality U.S.-based ones like OpenAI's GPT-4 or Anthropic's Claude, instead of directly training them on pirated copies of books by American authors...

One possible way for authors to get a fairer shake in the age of AI could be through the licensing of their work to AI companies...

There are already some such deals between publishers and AI companies in place, such as Perplexity AI's agreement with media entities like the Los Angeles Times and Le Monde to license content for the training of its models. There are also online licensing marketplaces, such as Created by Humans."

Anthropic's $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement Sets a Bad Precedent; Reason, July 23, 2026

 TOSIN AKINTOLA, Reason; Anthropic's $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement Sets a Bad Precedent

"The $1.5 billion award will be split among authors and publishers after fees and expenses are paid, netting everyone entitled to a claim roughly $3,000 per work, "four times the value of the statutory minimum," according to Nelson. 

Anthropic's decision to settle the case might hurt the company's pocketbook for now. Still, it likely avoids a court battle with even wider-reaching implications, since many AI companies use pirated data to train their models. Indeed, AI leaders such as Meta, Perplexity AI, Google, OpenAI, and Nvidia are facing lawsuits over similar copyright infringement claims. Anthropic is also being sued by Concord Music Group, which alleges that the company used copyrighted lyrics to train its Frontier AI model, Claude.

Time will tell how these disputes shake out, but courts placing restrictions on fair use of publicly available data will likely make AI models worse. Instead of settling potential copyright claims, AI companies will likely turn to a growing market for repositories of licensed copyrighted works. 

Of course, this will also make production of the models more expensive, a cost that will inevitably be passed on to consumers."

A24 Addresses Copyright Strikes on Backrooms Fan Art After Director Kane Parsons Promises to Investigate; IGN, July 17, 2026

 VIRGINIA GLAZE, IGN; A24 Addresses Copyright Strikes on Backrooms Fan Art After Director Kane Parsons Promises to Investigate

'We will continue to support the artists.'

"A24 has issued a statement clarifying the numerous takedown notices filed on behalf of its brand after Backrooms director Kane Parsons promised he’d investigate.

A24 published their statement via Instagram on July 17, just two days after Parsons responded to a Reddit post from a user claiming their wallpaper pattern had been pulled from Redbubble over copyright infringement."

OpenAI may have made a fatal misstep in copyright fight with news orgs; Ars Technica, July 9, 2026

 ASHLEY BELANGER  , Ars Technica; OpenAI may have made a fatal misstep in copyright fight with news orgs

"OpenAI is facing calls for “serious sanctions” after fighting to keep news organizations from snooping through millions of logs to find evidence of users skirting their paywalls by prompting ChatGPT to regurgitate their articles.

This evidence is considered among the most important to both sides, potentially either dooming OpenAI as an infringer or exonerating its chatbot technology as a transformative fair use of news sites’ content."

Intellectual Property Influence; UC Berkeley Law, June 10, 2026

  UC Berkeley Law; Intellectual Property Influence

"An article by Professor Pamela Samuelson has been selected as one of the best intellectual property papers of 2025 and will be included in the next edition of the Intellectual Property Law Review, published annually by Thomson Reuters. It’s the seventh time one of her articles has been recognized this way. 

“Justification for Fair Uses(opens in a new tab),” published in 2025 in the Wisconsin Law Review, explains the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith. Samuelson argues that the ruling preserved the standards for analyzing fair–use defenses the Court laid out in its 1984 Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. decision. 

“Contrary to what some have mistakenly asserted, nothing in Warhol abjures the rich body of fair use case law, both before and after Campbell, that has recognized many types of fair use justifications,” Samuelson writes."

U.S. Copyright Office Announces Copyright Essentials: Copyright 101 Webinar; U.S. Copyright Office, June 23, 2026

U.S. Copyright Office; U.S. Copyright Office Announces Copyright Essentials: Copyright 101 Webinar

"The U.S. Copyright Office invites you to register to attend the upcoming online webinar, “Copyright Essentials: Copyright 101,” on Wednesday, July 15 at 1:00 p.m. eastern time. This event is the latest edition in our educational series designed to teach copyright basics and key concepts to creators within various disciplines. 

In this session, join us as the Copyright Office discusses the foundations of copyright law, the process of copyright registration, and Copyright Office programs supporting research, enforcement, and understanding copyright concepts like fair use. We will answer commonly asked questions; review educational resources and registration options, such as the Office’s Copyright Registration Toolkit; and share how the Copyright Office’s Public Information Office can assist along the way. 

Speakers: 

• Samantha Levin, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Public Information and Education 
• Taylor Schumacher, Attorney-Advisor, Office of Public Information and Education 

The Copyright Office strategic goal of Copyright for All means making the copyright system as understandable and accessible to as many members of the public as possible, through initiatives including education and outreach. Subscribe to stay updated about future webinars in this series. 

Watch the complete set of recordings on our Copyright Essentials event page."

AI company argues its use of scraped Westlaw legal data was transformative; Courthouse News Service, June 11, 2026

 SYDNEY HAULENBEEK , Courthouse News Service; AI company argues its use of scraped Westlaw legal data was transformative

"“Fair use ruling here brings into question the core technology of the AI revolution,” Mark S. Davies of White & Case in Washington, attorney for ROSS, argued...

“This is a copyright case,” he said. “It’s an interesting case, it raises lots of issues, but it’s a copyright case and the point of copyright is progress.”

“Copyright is not a privilege reserved for the well-behaved,” Davies added."

Libraries’ summer 2026 webinars teach copyright, fair use basics in an hour; Penn State University Libraries, June 3, 2026

 Penn State University Libraries; Libraries’ summer 2026 webinars teach copyright, fair use basics in an hour

"Penn State University Libraries’ Office of Scholarly Communications and Copyright will offer two online workshops on copyright and fair use topics in summer 2026 for Penn State students, faculty and staff and the public.

Danielle Steinhart, interim copyright officer and head of the Office of Scholarly Communications and Copyright, will teach both workshops online via Zoom. Attendees are asked to please register in advance. Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research (RECR) program credit, formerly known as Scholarship and Research Integrity credit, will be available for both courses."

Scott Turow's latest real-life legal thriller: Suing Meta for copyright infringement; NPR, May 5, 2026

 Chloe Veltman, NPR ; Scott Turow's latest real-life legal thriller: Suing Meta for copyright infringement

""All Americans should understand that the bold future promised by A.I., has been, to paraphrase the investigative writer Alex Reisner, created with stolen words," said Turow in a statement to NPR. "It is all the more shameful that these violations of the law were undertaken by one of the richest corporations in the world."

According to the complaint, Meta "briefly considered licensing deals with major publishers" but changed its strategy in April 2023. The question of whether to license or pirate moving forward was "escalated" to Zuckerberg, after which, the complaint alleges, Meta's business development team received verbal instructions to stop licensing efforts. "If we license once [sic] single book, we won't be able to lean into the fair use strategy," a Meta employee is quoted as saying in the complaint.

"It's the most flagrant copyright breach in history," said Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger in a statement to NPR. "And these voracious tech companies need to be held accountable.""

Publishers sue Meta, claiming it violated copyrights in training AI with their books; The Washington Post, May 5, 2026

 Maegan Vazquez, The Washington Post; Publishers sue Meta, claiming it violated copyrights in training AI with their books

"The case, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, is the latest in a string of lawsuits brought by publishers, authors, artists, photographers and news outlets aimed at forcing tech companies to compensate them for using their works to train their AI models. The plaintiffs argue in the lawsuit that the AI model’s ability to quickly produce knockoffs and summaries of copyrighted books threatens the livelihoods of publishers and authors.

A Meta spokesperson said in a statement that the company would “fight this lawsuit aggressively.”

“AI is powering transformative innovations, productivity and creativity for individuals and companies, and courts have rightly found that training AI on copyrighted material can qualify as fair use,” the spokesperson said.

The publishers’ complaint states Meta distributed millions of copyrighted works without authorization and without compensating authors or publishers, claiming that Zuckerberg “personally authorized and actively encouraged the infringement.” They also claim that Meta removed copyright notices and copyright management information from the works used to train the AI model, known as Llama."

Even More Authors, Publishers Sue Meta Over Copyright in AI Training: What's Different Now; CNET, May 5, 2026

 Katelyn Chedraoui , CNET; Even More Authors, Publishers Sue Meta Over Copyright in AI Training: What's Different Now

Meta won a previous AI lawsuit brought by authors. Publishers are taking a different route this time.

"New lawsuit, same questions

Copyright is one of the most contentious legal issues around AI. Tech companies like Meta need high-quality, human-created data to build and refine their AI models. Nearly all of this material is protected by copyright. That means tech companies have to enter into licensing agreements or defend their use of the content as fair use under a provision of copyright law.

Meta and Anthropic have both won previous cases in lawsuits brought by authors, successfully defending their fair use. Anthropic agreed to settle some piracy claims with authors for $1.5 billion, or about $3,000 per pirated work. Both judges warned in their decisions that this won't be the result in every lawsuit...

One of the biggest considerations in these cases is whether tech companies' use of copyrighted books will make it harder for human authors to sell their work or otherwise affect the marketplace."

Intellectual Property and Brainpower Versus AI in Academic Publish; Academe Magazine, AAUP, Spring 2026

 Kelly Hand , Academe Magazine, AAUP; Intellectual Property and Brainpower Versus AI in Academic Publish

"The concept of transformation is central to US copyright law—which privileges “transformative” uses of copyrighted material in evaluating “fair use”—and emerging case law on AI. It’s worth thinking about what kind of transformation we value as human readers and writers and as beneficiaries of published academic research—particularly as we reckon with piracy in the training of LLMs and the unchecked growth of the AI industry. Considerations about how academic publications enable AI’s transformative processes extend beyond concerns about emotional authenticity important in creative writing to those about intellectual integrity and factual accuracy. 

Authors, editors, and publishers will need to make consequential IP decisions—including those about settlements in lawsuits over AI piracy, invitations to enter into licensing agreements with AI companies seeking to avoid future lawsuits, and editorial policies and guidelines to prevent the misuse of AI in academic research and writing. Some individuals and organizations, including scholarly publications and presses, will encounter opportunities to “cash in.” However, their relatively modest financial gains facilitate the disproportionate enrichment of AI companies that use copyrighted material for training LLMs. Even if that use is transformative in the strict legal sense, it fails to effect the kind of transformation that depends on the uniquely human capacities for thinking, feeling, and complex analysis. Academic journals and university presses must also protect IP—by upholding ethical standards and principles of copyright law—and commit to publishing human-authored works."

Netflix Prevails in ‘Tiger King’ Copyright Case, a Win for ‘Fair Use’ in Documentaries; Variety, April 30, 2026

  Gene Maddaus, Variety; Netflix Prevails in ‘Tiger King’ Copyright Case, a Win for ‘Fair Use’ in Documentaries

"Documentary filmmakers who use unlicensed video clips can breathe a little easier, after an appellate panel reversed itself Thursday in a closely watched copyright case involving Netflix‘s “Tiger King” series.

A three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the filmmakers’ use of a 66-second clip from a character’s funeral was sufficiently transformative to qualify for “fair use” protection."

Netflix fends off 'Tiger King' copyright claims again on appeal; Reuters, April 30, 2026

 Blake Brittain , Reuters; Netflix fends off 'Tiger King' copyright claims again on appeal

"A U.S. appeals court ruled ​for Netflix on Thursday in a cameraman's copyright infringement case against the streaming video company ‌over footage used in its hit 2020 documentary series "Tiger King."

The Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals determined that Netflix made fair use of one of Timothy Sepi's videos and affirmed its previous ruling that the company did not violate Sepi's rights ​in seven others."

The Basics Of Copyright For Films; Forbes, April 30, 2026

 Schuyler Moore,, Forbes; The Basics Of Copyright For Films

 "The film industry revolves around copyright, so an understanding of the basic issues relating to copyright is critical for understanding almost any film transaction."

Anthropic seeks pivotal court win in music publisher lawsuit over AI training; Reuters, April 21, 2026

 Blake Brittain, Reuters; Anthropic seeks pivotal court win in music publisher lawsuit over AI training

"Artificial intelligence company Anthropic has asked a California federal court to ​rule in its favor in a copyright lawsuit brought by music publishers Universal Music Group, Concord ‌and ABKCO, arguing it made "fair use" of their song lyrics to train its AI-powered chatbot Claude.

Anthropic's Monday filing addresses the key question for a wave of high-stakes copyright cases brought by creators against tech companies: is it legally permissible to copy millions of copyrighted works ​without permission to train AI models?...

The lawsuit ​is one of dozens of disputes between copyright owners such as authors and news outlets, and tech giants ​including OpenAI, Microsoft and Meta Platforms over the training of their AI systems. Amazon- and Google-backed Anthropic was the first major AI ‌company ⁠to settle one of the cases, agreeing last yearto pay a group of authors $1.5 billion to resolve a class-action lawsuit."

Anthropic’s Leaked Code Tests Copyright Challenges in A.I. Era; The New York Times, April 22, 2026

  Meaghan Tobin, The New York Times; Anthropic’s Leaked Code Tests Copyright Challenges in A.I. Era

Artificial intelligence tools are making it faster than ever to reproduce creative work. Does copyright even matter anymore?

"Sigrid Jin was waiting to board a plane when he saw stunning news that artificial intelligence start-up Anthropic had accidentally leaked the source code for Claude Code, its popular A.I. agent. Mr. Jin, 25, an undergraduate student, scrambled to post a copy online. His worried girlfriend quickly texted him: Was he violating copyright law?

Mr. Jin turned to a team of A.I. assistants for a solution. He directed them to rewrite the leaked code in another programming language, then shared that version online. Within hours, more than 100,000 people had liked or linked to it.

Anthropic, one of the leading A.I. companies alongside OpenAI, has said the leak had been caused by human error and, citing copyright violations, demanded that GitHub, an online library of computer code, remove posts sharing the code. Thousands of posts were taken down. But Mr. Jin’s version remains online. He said Anthropic had not asked him to take it down.

It is unclear whether Anthropic, which did not respond to questions from The New York Times, is drawing a distinction with the rewritten code. Mr. Jin said he believed rewriting the code transformed it into a new work, one that Anthropic could not claim ownership over.

He said he was driven less by money or fame than by a desire to make a broader philosophical point. What is the value of copyrighted intellectual property in an era when A.I. can easily replicate not just computer code but art, music and literature in minutes?

“I just wanted to raise some ethical questions in the A.I. agent era,” he said. “Any creative work can be reproduced in a second.”"

Another Court Rules Copyright Can’t Stop People From Reading and Speaking the Law; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), April 8, 2026

 MITCH STOLTZ, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Another Court Rules Copyright Can’t Stop People From Reading and Speaking the Law

"Another court has ruled that copyright can’t be used to keep our laws behind a paywall. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld a lower court’s ruling that it is fair use to copy and disseminate building codes that have been incorporated into federal and state law, even though those codes are developed by private parties who claim copyright in them. The court followed the suggestions EFF and others presented in an amicus brief, and joined a growing list of courts that have placed public access to the law over private copyright holders’ desire for control."