Anthropic faces $1.5B settlement

U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin on Thursday asked for more information before deciding whether to grant final approval to Anthropic’s proposed $1.5 billion settlement with authors who said the company used their books without permission to train Claude. The hearing took place in San Francisco in the Northern District of California, where the case began in August 2024. (money.usnews.com) The proposed deal would resolve class claims tied to more than 480,000 books, and plaintiffs’ lawyers told the court that claims were filed for more than 92% of those works. Reuters described it as the largest known U.S. copyright settlement. ### Why didn’t the judge approve the deal on Thursday? Judge Martinez-Olguin did not reject the settlement at the May 14 hearing. Reuters reported that she instead pressed lawyers for more detail on issues including attorneys’ fees and payments to the lead plaintiffs before deciding whether to sign off on the agreement. (money.usnews.com) William Alsup, the now-retired judge who previously handled the case, had preliminarily approved the settlement in September 2025. The case is now assigned to Martinez-Olguin, according to the docket. ### What exactly does the settlement cover? The settlement website says class members are legal or beneficial copyright owners of books included in the Anthropic Copyright Settlement, and it lists deadlines that have already passed for filing claims, opting out and objecting. (money.usnews.com) The claim deadline was March 30, 2026, while the opt-out and objection deadline passed on February 9, 2026. Reuters reported that the settlement covers more than 480,000 works. Courthouse News, citing plaintiffs’ counsel Justin Nelson of Susman Godfrey, said approximately 482,000 works were included and estimated payments at about $3,100 per work, though final allocations depend on approved claims and the settlement terms. (money.usnews.com) ### What did Anthropic already win, and what was still headed to trial? Judge Alsup ruled in June 2025 that Anthropic’s use of the authors’ books to train Claude was fair use, according to Reuters. But he also found that Anthropic infringed copyrights by storing more than 7 million pirated books in a “central library” that would not necessarily be used for AI training. (anthropiccopyrightsettlement.com) Reuters said a trial had been scheduled for December 2026 to determine how much Anthropic owed for that alleged piracy, with potential damages running into the hundreds of billions of dollars. The proposed settlement would avoid that trial for class members who stay in the deal. (money.usnews.com) ### Who is suing outside the settlement now? More than 25 writers who opted out of the settlement filed a new complaint against Anthropic in California on May 13, Reuters reported. Law.com said 28 writers brought that suit and asked for a jury trial, arguing that class treatment let AI companies wipe out high-value copyright claims too cheaply. (money.usnews.com) Dave Eggers and Vendela Vida were among the writers named by Reuters as part of that opt-out group. Their separate case means Anthropic could still face individual copyright claims even if the class settlement is approved. That is an inference from the existence of the new complaint and the settlement site’s statement that opting out preserves the ability to sue separately. (money.usnews.com) ### How does this fit into the wider AI copyright fight? Anthropic’s case is one of dozens of lawsuits brought by authors, publishers and news organizations against AI companies over model training, Reuters said. What makes this case unusual is that it has moved further than most: it produced a major fair-use ruling, a proposed $1.5 billion class settlement and now a second track of opt-out litigation. (money.usnews.com) Anthropic is backed by Amazon and Alphabet, according to Reuters, which adds to the scrutiny around the case because the company is one of the best-funded developers of large language models. The settlement record and court review now offer one of the clearest public measures yet of how expensive copyright disputes can become for an AI company even after winning a significant fair-use ruling. (money.usnews.com) That framing is an inference based on the size of the proposed payment and the still-pending opt-out suits. ### What happens next in court? May 14 is the latest public hearing date reflected in Reuters’ report, and the judge had not issued final approval as of that hearing. The settlement website says class members should check the site for updates, while the federal docket remains the formal record in Bartz v. (money.usnews.com) Anthropic, case 3:24-cv-05417, in the Northern District of California.