Power
Robot Reading a Book
(Getty Images)

Judge rules Anthropic training on books it purchased was “fair use,” but not for the ones it stole

Anthropic still faces litigation for training its models on millions of pirated texts.

When AI companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta were racing to build and train new large language models, they scrambled to find enough text to train their systems on. Countless web pages, photos, YouTube videos, Disney movies, Reddit threads, and book texts were slurped up to feed the models to add billions and billions of tokens.

Resulting litigation initiated by copyright holders has shown that the legality of the process was on the minds of some AI company employees, like researchers at Meta who raised concerns while training its Llama model, only to be told that the use of LibGen, a corpus of pirated texts, was approved by “MZ.”

But yesterday, a court decided a case partially in favor of AI companies, with far-reaching consequences for all the companies that were sucking copyrighted material into their models.

A federal judge in the Northern District of California has ruled that Anthropic was not violating the copyright of authors of the books it purchased and scanned for training.

A group of authors filed the suit against Anthropic last August, alleging that Anthropic had acknowledged training its Claude AI model using “The Pile,” a mass of text shared online that contained millions of copyrighted works, including some written by the plaintiffs.

The process of buying, scanning, and ingesting the text for use in training the Claude model was determined to be “exceedingly transformative and was a fair use under Section 107 of the Copyright Act” by Judge William Alsup, a key test of the fair use doctrine in intellectual property law.

But what about the “over seven million copies of books” that Anthropic admitted were pirated that it did not pay for? The judge said that was not fair use, and warrants its own trial.

Judge Alsup wrote:

“The downloaded pirated copies used to build a central library were not justified by a fair use. Every factor points against fair use. Anthropic employees said copies of works (pirated ones, too) would be retained ‘forever’ for ‘general purpose’ even after Anthropic determined they would never be used for training LLMs. A separate justification was required for each use. None is even offered here except for Anthropic’s pocketbook and convenience.”

The case is the first of its kind to be decided in the US, and lays out a potentially legal way for AI companies to safely train their models using copyrighted works — as long as they purchase them. That said, there are still many other cases pending and many factors at play before the industry has clear rules.

But companies that are caught knowingly using pirated, copyrighted works to train AI models may face new legal exposure.

An Anthropic spokesperson told Sherwood News:

“We are pleased that the Court recognized that using ‘works to train LLMs was transformative — spectacularly so.’ Consistent with copyright’s purpose in enabling creativity and fostering scientific progress, ‘Anthropic’s LLMs trained upon works not to race ahead and replicate or supplant them — but to turn a hard corner and create something different.’”

More Power

See all Power
power

Warner Bros. Discovery’s board tells shareholders to turn down Paramount’s “inadequate” hostile bid

Warner Bros. Discovery has told shareholders to reject Paramount’s hostile takeover bid, with the company releasing a statement early Wednesday urging shareholders to take the Netflix offer on the table. WBD’s board of directors said the outcome of the Netflix deal is “extraordinary by any measure.”

Paramount’s offer, in contrast, was described in the letter as “illusory,” providing “inadequate value,” and likely to impose “numerous, significant risks and costs on WBD.” The board said Paramount has “misled WBD shareholders that its proposed transaction has a ‘full backstop’ from the Ellison family,” and the board also outlined that it doesn’t believe there is a “material difference in regulatory risk between the PSKY offer and the Netflix merger.”

WBD shares dipped in the minutes leading up to the market close on Tuesday after news leaked that its management was preparing to encourage shareholders to reject Paramounts bid, and shares of the HBO parent were down at $28.66, off 0.83% from yesterday’s close, as of 7:56 a.m. ET on Wednesday. Netflix was ticking higher, up around 1.7%, and Paramount Skydance was modestly in the red, down 1%.

Several outlets have reported that Jared Kushners firm would back out of the group that had been assembled to help finance the Paramount bid. Confirming this withdrawal, a spokesperson for the firm helmed by the president’s son-in-law told NBC News that “the dynamics ​of the investment have changed significantly ​since we initially became ​involved ​in October.”

Analysts this month have said that a renewed bidding war for Warner Bros. seems “inevitable” given the antitrust concerns surrounding Netflix’s potential acquisition. President Trump on Tuesday appeared to distance himself from speculation around his closeness to Paramount’s owners, posting on Truth Social, “If they are friends, I’d hate to see my enemies!”

Warner’s attempt to influence its shareholders could fuel a higher bid from Paramount in the coming weeks — shareholders currently have until January 8 to decide whether to accept the current offer.

Paramount’s offer, in contrast, was described in the letter as “illusory,” providing “inadequate value,” and likely to impose “numerous, significant risks and costs on WBD.” The board said Paramount has “misled WBD shareholders that its proposed transaction has a ‘full backstop’ from the Ellison family,” and the board also outlined that it doesn’t believe there is a “material difference in regulatory risk between the PSKY offer and the Netflix merger.”

WBD shares dipped in the minutes leading up to the market close on Tuesday after news leaked that its management was preparing to encourage shareholders to reject Paramounts bid, and shares of the HBO parent were down at $28.66, off 0.83% from yesterday’s close, as of 7:56 a.m. ET on Wednesday. Netflix was ticking higher, up around 1.7%, and Paramount Skydance was modestly in the red, down 1%.

Several outlets have reported that Jared Kushners firm would back out of the group that had been assembled to help finance the Paramount bid. Confirming this withdrawal, a spokesperson for the firm helmed by the president’s son-in-law told NBC News that “the dynamics ​of the investment have changed significantly ​since we initially became ​involved ​in October.”

Analysts this month have said that a renewed bidding war for Warner Bros. seems “inevitable” given the antitrust concerns surrounding Netflix’s potential acquisition. President Trump on Tuesday appeared to distance himself from speculation around his closeness to Paramount’s owners, posting on Truth Social, “If they are friends, I’d hate to see my enemies!”

Warner’s attempt to influence its shareholders could fuel a higher bid from Paramount in the coming weeks — shareholders currently have until January 8 to decide whether to accept the current offer.

power
Jon Keegan

Senators open investigation into data centers’ effect on consumer utility bills

As Big Tech builds more and more massive data centers in small towns around the country, the public is starting to ask questions about whether they are to blame for rising utility bills.

Today Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) sent letters to the CEOs of some of the biggest builders of data centers: Meta, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, CoreWeave, Digital Realty, and Equinix.

The senators wrote:

“Utility companies have spent billions of dollars updating the electrical grid to accommodate the unprecedented energy demands of AI data centers and appear to recoup the costs by raising residential utility bills. Through these utility price increases, American families bankroll the electricity costs of trillion-dollar tech companies.”

Electricity prices in the US are indeed up, rising 6.2% since last year. A recent Bloomberg analysis found that ratepayers within 50 miles of data centers saw rates increase up to 276% over the past five years.

The companies have until January 12, 2026, to respond to the senators.

The senators wrote:

“Utility companies have spent billions of dollars updating the electrical grid to accommodate the unprecedented energy demands of AI data centers and appear to recoup the costs by raising residential utility bills. Through these utility price increases, American families bankroll the electricity costs of trillion-dollar tech companies.”

Electricity prices in the US are indeed up, rising 6.2% since last year. A recent Bloomberg analysis found that ratepayers within 50 miles of data centers saw rates increase up to 276% over the past five years.

The companies have until January 12, 2026, to respond to the senators.

power
Hyunsoo Rim

TIME names the “Architects of AI” as its Person of the Year for 2025

TIME just announced its Person of the Year… and it’s not a single person.  

The magazine selected the “Architects of AI” as its 2025 honoree, spotlighting the executives and engineers behind the year’s AI boom. One of the two covers features eight tech leaders perched on a steel beam — recreating the iconic “Lunch Atop a Skyscraper” photo from 1932 — including Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, AMD’s Lisa Su, xAI’s Elon Musk, OpenAI’s Sam Altman, and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang at the center, whose chips power many of today’s AI models.

Western Auctioneer with Two Fingers up and Gavel in Hand

As investors pick sides in Netflix vs. Paramount, analysts say a renewed Warner Bros. bidding war looks inevitable

Analysts at Bloomberg on Wednesday said Paramount’s WBD hostile takeover offer could go as high as $35 per share.

Netflix WBD CEOs

The Netflix-Warner Bros. deal now faces a wall of opposition

Netflix will owe Warner Bros. $5.8 billion in cash if the deal is terminated on antitrust grounds.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC produces fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and is a fully owned subsidiary of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, or Robinhood Money, LLC.