Elvis music rights owners sue Anthropic over copyright violations

The lawsuit against Anthropic

The owners of the rights to Elvis Presley's music have filed a lawsuit against the artificial intelligence company Anthropic. The legal complaint, filed on Friday, alleges that the company violated copyright laws by using Elvis's music to train its AI model, Claude. Authentic Brands Group, which owns the music rights, argues that the company used the catalog without obtaining any license.

The complaint specifically identifies 274 songs from the Elvis Presley catalog as being used during the training process. These works include famous tracks like "All Shook Up," "Can't Help Falling in Love," "A Little Less Conversation," "Don't Be Cruel," and "Return To Sender." Authentic Brands Group describes these compositions as some of the most influential and enduring pieces in human history.

The plaintiffs are seeking significant financial compensation for these violations. They are asking for payments of up to $150,000 for each individual song that was infringed. This brings the total amount of damages requested in the legal complaint to $41 million.

Allegations of unlicensed works

Authentic Brands Group claims that Anthropic has built its entire business model on copyright infringement at a scale that has never been seen before. The company argues that by using the music to train Claude, Anthropic created unlicensed derivative works. These are new works based on the original copyrighted material without the permission of the owners.

The lawsuit points to specific instances where the AI model appeared to cross the line from being inspired by a song to reproducing it. The complaint notes that even after Anthropic supposedly put up guardrails to prevent such behavior, the model continued to infringe. It highlights a specific interaction where the AI was asked to recreate songs for a modern audience.

According to the filing, Claude admitted that its renders were landing very close to the originals. The AI stated that it was reusing the same structure and hooks with only light rewording. The complaint argues that swapping out words while keeping the core structure is still a violation of the copyrighted song.

Anthropic's response and defense

Anthropic has already responded to the allegations made by the music rights owners. A spokesperson for the company told BBC News that they disagree with the claims. The company stated that they intend to defend the case fully in court.

This legal challenge is not the only copyright dispute currently facing the AI developer. The firm is currently involved in litigation with various other music stakeholders over similar concerns. These ongoing cases reflect a broader trend of music companies seeking to protect their intellectual property from being used by large-scale AI models.

The company is also dealing with a lawsuit from the music company Reservoir, which accused them of stealing lyrics. Additionally, Universal Music Group filed a lawsuit against Anthropic in January. These multiple legal fronts suggest that the industry is currently grappling with the boundaries of fair use in the age of generative AI.

The history of AI copyright

The legal battle over training data is part of a larger trend of litigation against AI companies. Last year, Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class action lawsuit. That case was brought by authors who claimed the company stole their work to train its AI models.

Lawyers for the authors described that settlement as the largest publicly reported copyright recovery in history. This massive payout highlights the scale of the financial risks that AI companies face when they use copyrighted data. It also shows how seriously the courts and the public are taking the protection of creative works.

The current lawsuit against Anthropic regarding Elvis Presley's music adds another layer to this complex legal landscape. It focuses specifically on the music industry and the rights of iconic catalogs. As more companies sue over different types of content, the legal framework for AI training will likely be shaped by these high-profile cases.

What comes next for the industry

The outcome of the Elvis Presley music rights case could have significant implications for how AI models are developed. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, it could force AI companies to pay significant licensing fees for training data. This would likely change the business models of companies that rely on large-scale data scraping.

Conversely, a ruling in favor of Anthropic might provide more leeway for AI developers to use existing content for training purposes. This would depend on whether the court views the AI's output as a transformative new work or a derivative infringement. The distinction between inspiration and reproduction remains a central point of contention in these cases.

For now, the legal battle continues as both sides prepare their arguments. The music industry is watching closely to see how the court handles the specific issue of song structures and hooks. The resolution of this case may provide a roadmap for future disputes between creators and artificial intelligence developers.