A Judge’s Ruling Favors Anthropic’s AI Technology, Raising Questions About Copyright Law
AI-summarised brief · reviewed before publication
Judge William Alsup's recent ruling has allowed Anthropic to continue training its generative AI models on copyrighted books, as long as the company scans legally obtained books into a computer and destroys the original works. The ruling, made on June 23, dismissed most claims in the lawsuit filed by authors who alleged that their books were used without permission to train Anthropic's Claude AI models. Only one claim, concerning Anthropic's initial use of pirated copies for its central library, was allowed to proceed. In his written decision, Judge Alsup referred to generative AI technology as "the most transformative many of us will see in our lifetimes." This statement has been seen as a significant factor in the ruling. The decision has been viewed as a win for Anthropic, but it has also raised concerns about clarity in copyright law. IP attorney and founder of Ambart Law, PLLC, Yelena Ambartsumian, has spoken out against the ruling, stating that it "ignores core copyright principles." One of the main concerns raised by Ambartsumian is the judge's logic around reproductions. The Copyright Act gives authors the exclusive right to make copies of their work, including large-scale duplication used during AI training. However, Judge Alsup wrote that no infringement occurs "where one copy entirely replaced the other." Ambartsumian has expressed her disappointment with the ruling, stating that it "is bad law" and allows Anthropic to reproduce copyrighted books without permission. She believes that the ruling fails to protect authors' rights and creates uncertainty in copyright law. Despite the concerns, Anthropic will still need to resolve its training practices using more than 7 million pirated titles through a trial. The outcome of this trial will have significant implications for the future of AI technology and copyright law.
