Anthropic Settlement Sparks Payment Disputes Between Authors and Publishers

A $1.5 billion copyright settlement involving Anthropic has triggered a series of disputes over payment allocations between authors, publishing houses, and literary agents, as TechCrunch first reported. According to the outlet, the settlement follows a judicial ruling that while training AI on copyrighted material is legal under fair use, pirating that material is not.

The deal, which received final approval in July, provides $3,000 for each of nearly 500,000 pirated titles. Per the settlement terms, authors of self-published works or those whose rights have reverted receive 100% of the payment. For books still in-print with traditional publishers, the payment is split 50-50. However, TechCrunch reports that authors are alleging publishers are claiming payments for works where rights have already reverted or seeking 100% of the payment despite only being entitled to 50%.

Specific disputes have surfaced, including claims from author April Henry that HarperCollins claimed a book that reverted 17 years ago. Victoria Strauss of the blog Writers Beware noted that the volume of reports suggests systemic errors rather than routine glitches. Additionally, Strauss reports that some literary agencies are seeking a cut of the payments, despite agents not being rightsholders.

Defenders of the publishers suggest the conflict is an administrative failure. Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger told The New York Times that she does not view the situation as a "grab by the publishers" but rather the result of a confusing settlement process and poor record-keeping. To qualify for a 100% claim, authors must prove rights reversion occurred before the August 10, 2022, "download date."