PayAuthorscom

News

AI copyright news, graded by source

Court rulings, company filings and allegations in the copyright cases against AI companies and pirate libraries, over books, articles, music, images, video and code. Checked for new filings every three hours; items are posted after review, so some appear later. Get these by e-mail · Court filings, free to read

Each item is graded by its source: a court’s ruling or order; a company’s own filing about itself; a defendant’s filing arguing its side; a plaintiffs’ filing; the claims in a complaint (allegation); or press reporting.

What the labels mean

Get these updates by e-mail

For all news.

How the e-mails work

Uses the cases, search, kind and company you set above (not the month or sort). As we post means within about 15 minutes of a new item; digests go out in the morning, U.S. Central time, weekly on Mondays, and only when something new matches. Updates start right away, and every e-mail has a one-click unsubscribe. If you tick Catch me up, the earlier items that match also come two a day, oldest first, each morning until you are up to date; you can stop that alone from any e-mail. Someone you invite gets one e-mail asking them to accept, and nothing more unless they do; we don’t tell them who invited them. Privacy.

AllegationAugust 17, 2026Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC (Concord I) · N.D. Cal., No. 5:24-cv-03811 (Judge Eumi K. Lee)

Publishers answer that Anthropic's own claim it does not need their lyrics defeats its fair-use defense, and that Claude's lyric outputs show why it copied them

In their combined opposition and reply filed Aug. 17, 2026 (Dkt. 756; public refiling Sept. 22, 2026 as Dkt. 876), the music publishers argue that because Anthropic says it has no particular need for their lyrics, it has no justification for copying them under the Supreme Court's Warhol decision. They say Anthropic copied whole lyrics so Claude could output verbatim copies, AI derivatives and machine-made substitutes, and that Anthropic's uses of Claude for coding or drug research have nothing to do with lyrics. They argue market harm need only be likely if the use became widespread, and point to AI-generated songs crowding streaming platforms and charts. They contrast Bartz and Kadrey, where courts found no infringing output and insufficient evidence of market harm. They also argue Anthropic's guardrails show it controls Claude's output and so acts with volition. These are the publishers' claims; the court has not ruled.

Publishers' opposition and reply, public refiling (Dkt. 876, PDF) ↗

Loading the rest of the news…

What the labels mean

Every item says what kind of source it rests on. A court ruling or order is the court's own statement. A company filing is what a defendant says about itself. A government filing is a statement by a government agency that is not a party to the case, such as a statement of interest; it is the government's position, not a ruling. An allegation is what a complaint or motion claims and has not been decided. Reported means press reporting we have not confirmed from the primary document. Summaries are our own; follow the links for the source.

This page is general information, not legal advice. An allegation is not a finding. Whether any of this matters for a particular work or claim is a question for a lawyer.