Some authors hoping to receive their share of Anthropic's $1.5 billion copyright settlement received surprising emails this week—notifications that someone else was staking a claim on their payments. The settlement, which resolved a class action lawsuit over Anthropic's use of copyrighted books to train its AI models, was granted final approval in July 2026, allowing distributions to proceed. While a court ruled that training AI on copyrighted material falls under fair use, it determined that pirating that material did not, leading to this compensation framework.
Under the terms of the deal, authors of nearly 500,000 titles are entitled to $3,000 for each pirated work. For books still in print with traditional publishers, payments are split evenly between the author and the publisher. For self-published works—or books where the publisher has reverted rights due to going out of print—the author should receive the full amount. But writers are increasingly reporting that publishers are claiming more than their fair share.
Mystery author April Henry voiced her frustration on social media, asking why HarperCollins had claimed one of her books that reverted to her over 17 years ago. She noted that on the same day she received the claim notification, she also got a credit alert showing HarperCollins had been added as her employer—though she said they never were. At the blog Writers Beware, Victoria Strauss wrote that she has collected complaints falling into two broad categories: publishers seeking payment for works to which they no longer hold rights, and publishers claiming 100% of a payment when they are only entitled to 50%.
Strauss expressed reluctance to attribute the pattern to malice, suggesting poor recordkeeping might explain many cases. Some publishers have already acknowledged mistakes and asked Anthropic to correct them. Similarly, Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger told The New York Times she doesn't see this as "a grab by the publishers" or a deliberate attempt to shortchange authors, but as an expected consequence of sloppy records and a complex settlement process.
While Strauss acknowledged that the complaints represent only "a peek through a small crack in a massive wall," she noted the sheer volume and repetition of errors in recent days indicates something beyond routine glitches. "The unusually large number of reports I've received over the last two days, as well as the fact that authors are reporting the exact same errors over and over, suggest to me that these aren't the kind of routine glitches you might expect from such a large operation, but something much more widespread and systemic," she wrote.
Publishers aren't the only parties seeking a cut. Strauss has also received complaints about literary agencies making claims on settlements. She called this surprising since agents are not rightsholders in the books they sell. If these claims persist, they could further delay or complicate payments for aggrieved authors, casting a shadow over the settlement's intended relief.
via TechCrunch AI