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 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.

Defendant's filing (argument)September 17, 2026Concord Music Group, Inc. v. Anthropic PBC (Concord I) · N.D. Cal., No. 5:24-cv-03811-EKL (Judge Eumi K. Lee)

Anthropic tells Judge Lee the Ninth Circuit's Doe v. GitHub ruling supports its bid to throw out the music publishers' DMCA claim, with both sides' summary judgment motions set for an Oct. 21 hearing

Anthropic filed a statement of recent decision on Sept. 17, 2026, one day after the Ninth Circuit's opinion in Doe v. GitHub, which affirmed dismissal of claims that an AI coding model removed copyright management information in violation of 17 U.S.C. 1202(b). Anthropic says the decision bears on the DMCA arguments in its combined motion for summary judgment and opposition (Dkt. 694), the publishers' combined opposition and reply (Dkt. 759) and its own reply (Dkt. 800), and offers to file a short supplemental brief. The cross-motions are noticed for hearing on Oct. 21, 2026. The publishers moved on March 23, 2026 for partial summary judgment that Anthropic directly infringed 499 lyric works by copying them in training and in Claude's output and that the copying is not fair use. Anthropic's Sept. 8 reply argues that training a general-purpose model is a transformative use that must be judged separately from outputs under Warhol, that lyrics were swept in as a tiny fraction of publicly available web text, that users rather than Anthropic supply the volitional conduct behind any lyric output, and that the publishers lack evidence of market harm. None of this has been decided.

Anthropic's Statement of Recent Decision, Dkt. 805 (RECAP) ↗Anthropic's Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment (public redacted), Dkt. 801 (RECAP) ↗Publishers' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (redacted), Dkt. 594 (RECAP) ↗

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.