Anthropic sued over alleged theft of ‘tens of thousands’ of songs
Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell have filed a multibillion-dollar lawsuit against Anthropic, alleging the AI company unlawfully used "tens of thousands" of copyrighted songs, including tracks by Mariah Carey, Marvin Gaye and Survivor, to train its Claude chatbot. The publishers, who manage rights on behalf of songwriters, describe it as "one of the largest and most blatant ongoing thefts of intellectual property in history", and the case adds to mounting legal pressure on Anthropic as it prepares for a stock market listing potentially valued at $2tn.
The suit, filed in a California court on 28 August, names Anthropic, chief executive Dario Amodei and co-founder Benjamin Mann, accusing them of torrenting, scraping and downloading lyrics and sheet music, including songs such as Livin' on a Prayer and Hallelujah, and reproducing them in chatbot responses. It also alleges Anthropic stripped identifying data from works to avoid attribution and licensing fees, and is seeking damages of up to $150,000 per infringed work plus $25,000 per instance of data removal, potentially totalling billions of dollars. The claim follows a $1.5bn settlement Anthropic reached with US authors, and comes alongside separate copyright disputes involving Universal Music Group, Concord Music Group and, in a related industry case, AI music generator Suno's loss to Germany's GEMA.
- Sony Music and Warner Chappell sue Anthropic over alleged song copyright theft
- Claims Anthropic scraped/torrented lyrics to train Claude AI
- Damages could reach billions; Anthropic says it will contest the claims
New here? Start with this
Anthropic makes Claude, an AI chatbot that learns patterns from large collections of text and other material. Song lyrics and sheet music are protected by copyright, and music publishers manage rights for songwriters, including permissions and payments for use of their work.
Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell represent songwriters whose works are named in the case. Anthropic’s leaders are also named. The dispute concerns whether the company used songs to train Claude and whether the chatbot reproduced protected material; those are allegations for the court to assess.
The case sits within wider legal disputes over how AI companies use copyrighted material. Its outcome could affect how music rights are licensed for AI training and what compensation publishers and songwriters may seek.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Songwriters and publishers can argue that training on complete lyrics and sheet music without permission takes and exploits creative work, especially if a system can reproduce protected passages or compete with licensed uses. Requiring consent, attribution and payment would uphold creators’ rights and help sustain the livelihoods and investment that make new music possible.
The case against
Anthropic can argue that analysing lawfully accessible works to train a general-purpose AI is transformative rather than a substitute for the songs, and that copyright should not prevent useful learning from existing culture. It may also dispute whether the alleged copying, removal of identifying data or chatbot outputs meet the legal tests for infringement, leaving those questions for the courts to decide.
AI Art Business Celebrity Companies Culture Entertainment Music Technology