4 ms·

>> I'm sure all the artists and creators they stole from had stipulations too. > Anthropic paid one billion in a copyright settlement. Because a judge determi

>> I'm sure all the artists and creators they stole from had stipulations too. > Anthropic paid one billion in a copyright settlement. Because a judge determined Anthropic was engaged in piracy. > That's a lot of money considering they never distributed the pirated books they trained on. This is "fruit of the poisonous tree" as it were. Distributing content derived from pirated content ("pirated books they trained on") is why Anthropic had to pay what they paid. > Nowadays they buy copies of books, train on them, and then destroy them. There is a case one could make that this practice could be seen as unauthorized redistribution of a derivative work intended to deprive copyright holders of legitimate revenue.

cubefox 3mo ago
There no hypocrisy in saying that it is unethical and immoral to rob a former robber, especially if he was already harshly punished for his crime. Two wrongs don't make a right. I can't believe have to even point this out.
- watwut 3mo ago
  They were not "harshly punished". As always, they get slap on the wrist, proceed to benefit from the crime and that is it. You and I would be harshly punished. Anthropic was not.
  - cubefox 3mo ago
    1.5 billion dollars are not a "slap on the wrist". That's a huge amount of money. It exceeded the amount they would have legally paid for those books by orders of magnitude.
    - AdieuToLogic 3mo ago
      > 1.5 billion dollars are not a "slap on the wrist". It is when the wrist being slapped raised $30 billion and had a valuation $380 billion[0] in the month of February 2026. Some would call the $1.5 billion piracy settlement "cost of doing business." And they would be right in this case. > It exceeded the amount they would have legally paid for those books by orders of magnitude. Making the argument that a piracy settlement exceeds what a corporation would have paid for each individual book pirated, when said distribution exceeds individual copies of each book "by orders of magnitude" (your words, not mine) is disingenuous at best. 0 - https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2026/02/13/anthropic-the-380-billion-powerhouse-hiding-in-plain-sight/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2026/02/13/anthropic...

cubefox 3mo ago

There no hypocrisy in saying that it is unethical and immoral to rob a former robber, especially if he was already harshly punished for his crime. Two wrongs don't make a right. I can't believe have to even point this out.

watwut 3mo ago
They were not "harshly punished". As always, they get slap on the wrist, proceed to benefit from the crime and that is it. You and I would be harshly punished. Anthropic was not.
- cubefox 3mo ago
  1.5 billion dollars are not a "slap on the wrist". That's a huge amount of money. It exceeded the amount they would have legally paid for those books by orders of magnitude.
  - AdieuToLogic 3mo ago
    > 1.5 billion dollars are not a "slap on the wrist". It is when the wrist being slapped raised $30 billion and had a valuation $380 billion[0] in the month of February 2026. Some would call the $1.5 billion piracy settlement "cost of doing business." And they would be right in this case. > It exceeded the amount they would have legally paid for those books by orders of magnitude. Making the argument that a piracy settlement exceeds what a corporation would have paid for each individual book pirated, when said distribution exceeds individual copies of each book "by orders of magnitude" (your words, not mine) is disingenuous at best. 0 - https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2026/02/13/anthropic-the-380-billion-powerhouse-hiding-in-plain-sight/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2026/02/13/anthropic...