Elvis Presley rights holders sue Anthropic over AI training data

The lawsuit against Anthropic

A subsidiary of Authentic Brands Group, the company that manages much of Elvis Presley’s intellectual property, has filed a lawsuit against the AI firm Anthropic. The legal action focuses on the use of 274 songs associated with the music icon to train the company's AI models. These works include some of Presley's most famous hits, such as 'Don’t Be Cruel' and 'Return To Sender'.

The plaintiffs argue that Anthropic used copyrighted compositions and lyrics without obtaining permission or paying any fees to the rights holders. They claim the company built its business model on a scale of copyright infringement never seen before. This move follows a growing trend of music entities seeking to protect their catalogs from unauthorized AI integration.

As reported by NME, the lawsuit specifically targets the technology behind the chatbot Claude. The plaintiffs allege that the AI is capable of generating unauthorized versions of existing songs. They believe this capability threatens the exclusive rights held by the entities that manage Presley's name, image, and musical legacy.

Technical claims of infringement

The legal filing alleges that Claude has continued to reproduce copyrighted material even after Anthropic introduced specific safeguards. These safeguards were intended to prevent the chatbot from generating existing song lyrics. However, the plaintiffs claim the system still produces content that is too similar to the originals.

According to the filing, when users asked Claude to recreate songs for a modern audience, the AI produced material that closely resembled the original works. This suggests that the training data deeply influenced the model's ability to mimic specific styles and structures. The plaintiffs argue that this output constitutes a direct violation of their copyrights.

Anthropic has not yet issued a public response to this specific lawsuit. However, the company has previously stated that using copyrighted works to train AI models might be allowed under US fair use laws. Fair use is a legal doctrine that allows the use of copyrighted material without permission under certain circumstances, such as for commentary or research.

The financial and legal stakes

The plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages of up to $150,000 for each of the 274 songs involved in the case. This calculation brings the total amount sought in the lawsuit to approximately $41.1 million. These figures represent the potential financial impact of the unauthorized use of Presley's catalog.

Richard Busch, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, said the lawsuit aims to enforce exclusive rights against a business model built on infringement. This statement underscores the severity with which the rights holders view the AI's training methods.

Busch has a history of representing music estates in high-profile copyright disputes. He previously represented Marvin Gaye’s estate in a landmark case against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams. That case resulted in a ruling that a 2013 hit song infringed on a 1977 track by Gaye, showing the attorney's experience in navigating complex music copyright issues.

A broader industry trend

This lawsuit is not an isolated incident involving Anthropic. In October 2023, Universal Music Publishing Group, Concord Music Group, and ABKCO sued the company for reproducing copyrighted lyrics. Those examples included songs by artists such as Katy Perry, Gloria Gaynor, and The Rolling Stones.

Additionally, Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell filed their own lawsuit against Anthropic in August. They accused the company of using copyrighted lyrics and sheet music from major artists including Taylor Swift, Michael Jackson, and The Beatles. These actions indicate a coordinated effort by major publishers to establish boundaries for AI training.

Other musicians are also taking action against different AI platforms. For instance, Jason Isbell and other artists sued the music generator Suno in September. They alleged that the tool allowed users to imitate their identities and musical styles without their consent. These various cases reflect a broader movement to secure protections for artists against unauthorized AI use.

The future of AI music rights

The music industry continues to call for stronger protections regarding AI and copyright. In the UK, prominent artists including Paul McCartney, Elton John, and Dua Lipa have campaigned for safeguards against the unauthorized use of their work. These efforts aim to ensure that creators are compensated and credited when their work is used to develop new technologies.

The outcome of the Elvis Presley lawsuit could provide a significant roadmap for how courts interpret the training of large language models. If the court finds that training on 274 songs constitutes infringement, it could force AI companies to license music data. This would change the current landscape where many models are trained on massive, scraped datasets.

For now, the legal battle remains in its early stages as the courts weigh the arguments of the rights holders against the claims of fair use. The resolution will likely determine how much of the existing musical history can be used to power the next generation of generative AI. It remains to be seen whether these lawsuits will lead to new licensing agreements or stricter regulatory requirements.

],