zlacker

[return to "Anthropic cut up millions of used books, and downloaded 7M pirated ones – judge"]
1. dehrma+DS[view] [source] 2025-07-07 16:02:04
>>pyman+(OP)
The important parts:

> Alsup ruled that Anthropic's use of copyrighted books to train its AI models was "exceedingly transformative" and qualified as fair use

> "All Anthropic did was replace the print copies it had purchased for its central library with more convenient space-saving and searchable digital copies for its central library — without adding new copies, creating new works, or redistributing existing copies"

It was always somewhat obvious that pirating a library would be copyright infringement. The interesting findings here are that scanning and digitizing a library for internal use is OK, and using it to train models is fair use.

◧◩
2. 6gvONx+hW[view] [source] 2025-07-07 16:25:05
>>dehrma+DS
You skipped quotes about the other important side:

> But Alsup drew a firm line when it came to piracy.

> "Anthropic had no entitlement to use pirated copies for its central library," Alsup wrote. "Creating a permanent, general-purpose library was not itself a fair use excusing Anthropic's piracy."

That is, he ruled that

- buying, physically cutting up, physically digitizing books, and using them for training is fair use

- pirating the books for their digital library is not fair use.

◧◩◪
3. throwa+QY[view] [source] 2025-07-07 16:39:13
>>6gvONx+hW
So all they have to do is go and buy a copy of each book they pirated. They will have ceased and desisted.
◧◩◪◨
4. tzs+Ak1[view] [source] 2025-07-07 18:46:01
>>throwa+QY
Generally you don't want laws to work that way. You want to set the penalties so that they discourage violating the law.

Setting the penalty to what it would have cost to obey the law in the first place does the opposite.

[go to top]