The fourth music lawsuit against Claude’s maker in 2026. This time, plaintiffs found the gap the earlier $1.5 billion authors’ settlement left wide open — song lyrics buried inside 5 million pirated books, never covered by that deal, never paid for.
Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell Music, along with 33 affiliated publishers, sued Anthropic Friday, alleging “one of the largest and most blatant ongoing thefts of intellectual property in history.” The 48-page complaint, filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, names CEO Dario Amodei and co-founder Benjamin Mann as individual defendants alongside the company. Plaintiffs accuse Anthropic of “a brazen campaign of torrenting, scraping and downloading copyrighted works on a massive scale” to train Claude, then reproducing that material — sometimes verbatim — in the model’s own outputs. The suit seeks up to $150,000 per infringed work, plus up to $25,000 for each instance of stripped copyright management information — a figure that, across “tens of thousands” of infringed compositions, could run into the billions.
What’s Happening & Why It Matters
The Gap Left Open
Here’s what makes this case distinct from a generic copyright complaint. As TF covered in Anthropic’s $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement With Authors, a federal judge granted final approval to a $1.5 billion settlement with authors and publishers in July, covering 482,460 works at $3,000 per work. That deal resolved claims about Anthropic’s acquisition and copying of books through August 2025. It did not release claims tied to what Claude’s outputs produce, or to material absent from the settlement’s specific works list.
That’s the gap Sony and Warner just stepped into. The complaint’s starting point is the same dataset—5 million books from LibGen and 2 million from PiLiMi —facts already established in the authors’ case. But when a single pirated book contains both novel text and embedded song lyrics or sheet music, acquiring that one book creates two separate legal claims, held by two different sets of rights holders. Authors settled their portion in July. Music publishers just filed for theirs.
Familiar Songs, an Unusual Legal Wrinkle
The complaint names specific compositions reproduced by Claude, including “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough,” “All I Want for Christmas Is You,” “Eye of the Tiger,” “Here Comes Santa Claus,” and “Paper Rings.” Plaintiffs also allege Anthropic scraped licensed lyric repositories like MusixMatch and LyricFind — a distinct claim from the pirated-books allegation, and one that resembles the New York Times’ earlier lawsuit against OpenAI, Microsoft, and Perplexity over verbatim reproduction of copyrighted text.
Axios flagged a structural complication worth understanding here. Music copyright is fragmented — a single song can carry owned rights across lyrics, sound recording, and composition, split among artists, publishers, and labels. That fragmentation is why Anthropic faces four separate music-industry lawsuits in 2026 alone. BMG sued in March over 493 compositions from artists including Justin Bieber, Bruno Mars, and the Rolling Stones. Round Hill Music filed a fourth suit on 17 August. Sony and Warner’s filing is the largest and most recent entrant in a pattern that’s been building for months.
What the Publishers Want
Beyond statutory damages, the complaint seeks extensive non-monetary relief: a permanent injunction against infringement, a full accounting of Anthropic’s training data and methods, and court-supervised destruction of infringing copies still in the company’s possession. That’s a more aggressive ask than a straightforward damages claim — it’s designed to force disclosure of how Claude was built, not just extract a payment for what already happened.
The complaint’s own language leaves little doubt about how plaintiffs intend to present Anthropic’s posture: “Anthropic clearly considers that to be just the cost of doing business given that its entire business model continues to be built on copyright theft.” That’s a shot at the July settlement itself — plaintiffs reading a $1.5 billion resolution not as accountability, but as evidence Anthropic has already priced infringement into its operations.
TF Summary: What’s Next
Anthropic has not filed a formal response to the complaint. No court date has been scheduled. The plaintiffs are seeking a jury trial. Anthropic’s defence — that AI training constitutes fair use — will need to contend with the distinct piracy-acquisition allegations that TF’s earlier coverage confirmed already produced a $1.5 billion settlement in a similar case.
MY FORECAST: Expect Anthropic to pursue a settlement track here too, following the exact playbook TF documented in the authors’ case — the piracy-acquisition allegations in both lawsuits are identical. A company that already agreed to pay $1.5 billion for one category of pirated content has limited room to argue a different legal theory applies to lyrics pulled from the same pirated books. Watch for additional music publishers to file comparable suits before year-end, given that this case shows the July settlement’s works list didn’t cover every rights holder with a legitimate claim. The real number to track isn’t the headline $150,000-per-work figure — it’s how many “tens of thousands” of compositions survive discovery as infringed, since that count determines whether this settles in the hundreds of millions or approaches the billions plaintiffs.
Related Stories
- Anthropic’s $1.5 Billion Copyright Settlement With Authors
- Google Loses Another Round Fighting AI Web Scraping
- A Judge Rules Pentagon’s Anthropic Blacklisting Illegal