Anthropic Must Destroy Pirated Book Files
By Justin Sorrell — PartnerCopyrighted Material May Constitute Fair Use
Last year, the Northern District of California issued its landmark decision in Bartz et al. v. Anthropic PBC, which addressed whether artificial intelligence companies may use copyrighted works to train large language models (“LLMs”) such as Claude. The Court decided that Anthropic’s use of copyrighted books to train its LLMs constituted “fair use” under Section 107 of the Copyright Act, but concluded that Anthropic’s acquisition and retention of pirated copies of books presented separate copyright concerns.
$1.5 Billion Class Action Settlement Approved
The case has now reached another significant milestone. On July 20, 2026, the Court granted final approval of a $1.5 billion class action settlement resolving claims arising from Anthropic’s downloading and retention of pirated books from online repositories. The settlement has been described as the largest copyright class action recovery in U.S. history.
Under the settlement, eligible authors and publishers may receive compensation for covered works, and Anthropic is required to destroy the pirated book files it downloaded. Importantly, the settlement does not disturb the Court’s earlier ruling that training an AI model on copyrighted books can constitute fair use under certain circumstances. Nor does the settlement provide Anthropic with immunity from future claims involving AI-generated outputs or future conduct.
One of the Most Significant AI Copyright Decisions Thus Far
As a result, Bartz remains one of the most significant AI copyright decisions to date. The litigation produced two distinct developments: (1) a Court decision that AI training on copyrighted works may qualify as fair use, and (2) a record-setting settlement arising from Anthropic’s use of pirated copies of those works. While the settlement concludes this particular dispute, numerous other copyright cases against AI developers remain pending, and the broader legal framework governing AI and intellectual property continues to evolve.
Justin Sorrell – Attorney at Law
Justin is a problem-solver who seeks creative solutions to his clients’ legal issues while understanding and advising his clients of the business impact of litigation and transaction choices to help guide his clients’ decision-making. Justin has served as outside corporate counsel, including handling bank loan transactions, real estate transactions, and commercial leases, and loan work-outs and bankruptcy matters.
When disputes arise and an amicable resolution is not possible, Justin is an experienced litigator who aggressively and diligently pursues his clients’ interests in many types of disputes in federal and state courts across Indiana. He often represents businesses and employers in lawsuits including wage and retaliation claims, trade secret and confidentiality claims, non-competition and non-solicitation covenants, breach of contract claims, collections, and appeals. Justin also defends health-care providers against licensing complaints, including against consumer complaints and administrative complaints brought by the Office of the Attorney General. He has helped numerous clients amicably resolve contentious disputes, saving them and their businesses significant time and money.
© Riley Bennett Egloff LLP
Disclaimer: Article is made available for educational purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. If you have questions about any matters in this article, please contact the author directly.
Permissions: You are permitted to reproduce this material in any format, provided that you do not alter the content in any way and do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction. Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: “By Justin O. Sorrell © Riley Bennett Egloff LLP — Indianapolis, Indiana. www.rbelaw.com”
Posted on July 22, 2026 by Justin O. Sorrell