Elvis Presley's catalog owners sue Anthropic over Claude training
The rights holders to Presley's songs say Anthropic trained Claude on them without permission, adding a new front to the AI copyright fight.
The short version
- Authentic Brand Groups leads a coalition that collectively owns the rights to Presley's catalog
- The filing names "Can't Help Falling in Love" and "Run On" as songs used to train Claude
- The plaintiffs seek $150,000 per song, totaling $41 million
- Vulture says this is the first suit against Anthropic by the owners of a single artist's catalog
- It is an allegation; no court has ruled
Why it matters
Courts have not settled whether training AI on copyrighted songs needs permission or payment. A case built around one famous catalog could shape how music is treated. If you use AI output commercially, the rules may shift under you.
What the lawsuit claims
The people who own the rights to Elvis Presley's music are suing Anthropic, the maker of the Claude chatbot. As Vulture reported, citing a lawsuit obtained by Pitchfork, the plaintiffs say Anthropic trained Claude on Presley's songs without permission.
Authentic Brand Groups leads the group of plaintiffs, who together hold the rights to the catalog. The filing names "Can't Help Falling in Love" and "Run On" among the songs used.
The evidence they point to
The complaint goes beyond training. It says Claude keeps infringing today. According to the filing, when someone asked Claude to recreate specific songs for a modern audience, it did so.
The filing also quotes Claude as saying its versions stayed very close to the originals. It reportedly said they kept the same structure and hooks, with only light rewording, and that this went past being inspired by a song and into reproducing it.
The money and the lawyers
The plaintiffs ask for $150,000 per song, which adds up to $41 million. Their lead attorney, Richard Busch, said his clients are "deeply protective of these iconic songs."
He also argued that Anthropic built its business on copyright infringement at an unprecedented scale. That is the plaintiffs' view, and Anthropic's response is not in the source we have.
Why this case stands out
Vulture describes this as the first time owners of a single artist's catalog have taken Anthropic to court. A famous, tightly controlled catalog makes the copyright question concrete: here are the songs, and here is what the chatbot allegedly produced.
A lawsuit is not a verdict. Nothing has been decided, and the case could take a long time to resolve.
What to watch
- How Anthropic responds in court to the claims about Claude's training and outputs
- Whether other single-artist catalog owners file similar suits
Try it
If you sell anything made with AI, keep a simple log of which model made what and when, and save your prompts and drafts. Avoid asking a model to imitate a specific artist's work for something you will sell.
Sources and links
- ReportingVulture: the article we sourced
Liked it? Say why
Add a line for other readers.
No account needed. We never show your email. Comments with links, ads or abuse are held and not shown. Your comment shows after a quick check.
Listen to the AI Wire headlines
Listen to the AI WireListen to our daily AI shows every morning: on your commute, in the shower, wherever you are
Listen to the daily showsFirst reported by Vulture · Read the original. Written by the SI Agent News Desk from the reporting above.Written with AI from the source above. Every number is checked against the source. Spot a mistake? Corrections.