John Carreyou and Other Authors Bring New Lawsuit Against Six Major AI Companies
- Reference: 0180447255
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/12/23/2254257/john-carreyou-and-other-authors-bring-new-lawsuit-against-six-major-ai-companies
- Source link:
> If this sounds familiar, it's because another set of authors already filed a class action suit against Anthropic for these same acts of copyright infringement. In that case, the [2]judge ruled that it was legal for Anthropic and similar AI companies to train on pirated copies of books, but that it was not legal to pirate the books in the first place.
>
> While eligible writers can receive about $3,000 from the $1.5 billion Anthropic settlement, some authors were dissatisfied with that resolution -- it doesn't hold AI companies accountable for the actual act of using stolen books to train their models, which generate billions of dollars in revenue.
The plaintiffs in the new lawsuit say the proposed Anthropic settlement "seems to serve [the AI companies], not creators."
"LLM companies should not be able to so easily extinguish thousands upon thousands of high-value claims at bargain-basement rates, eliding what should be the true cost of their massive willful infringement."
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/23/john-carreyrou-and-other-authors-bring-new-lawsuit-against-six-major-ai-companies/
[2] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/08/26/1848219/anthropic-settles-major-ai-copyright-suit-brought-by-authors
Copyright is about works not fairness (Score:1)
You can spend a million dollars and years of your time to surface new facts previously unknown to humanity and then turn around and disclose them in your own book.
Someone else can read your book and disclose the same facts to the world for free or in their own book. This really sucks for the person who spent all that time and effort and it certainly isn't fair. It also has absolutely nothing to do with copyright law.
You can make the case on the front end about illegal copying of fixed works for training..
Res Judicata (Score:2)
The problem is that they're doing it wrong, they should have opted out of the class, and filed a notice of appeal with regards to the judge's findings on the law, rather than try to relitigate what the law is, when that is going to be barred by collateral estoppel / res judicata.
Authors: We Don't Understand Copyright (Score:2)
Given the obvious transformative nature of LLM training and the judge's early and ready acknowledgment of same, who convinced these ding-dong authors they had a case?
Pirated? (Score:1)
> accusing the AI firms of training models on pirated copies of their books.
So if the AI co's scanned purchased books they would be fine with it?
Good for them (Score:2)
I hope they win