Anthropic’s $1.5B copyright settlement approved; only 350 authors opted out
Anthropic’s $1.5B copyright settlement approved; only 350 authors opted out
Anthropic 15 亿美元版权和解协议获批；仅 350 名作者选择退出
On Monday, a judge approved a $1.5 billion settlement between Anthropic and authors, ending the largest copyright class-action ever certified and granting the largest copyright settlement ever reached. Back in May, some authors fought to block the settlement, which was proposed after the court ruled that Anthropic training AI on books was fair use; however, its piracy of works was likely not. Authors opposing the settlement argued that lawyers’ fees were too high and authors’ payouts were too low. Hoping to avoid accepting the estimated $3,000-per-work payout and file separate lawsuits to seek higher damages, a handful of authors tried to opt out past the deadline.
周一，一位法官批准了 Anthropic 与作者之间 15 亿美元的和解协议，结束了有史以来规模最大的版权集体诉讼，并达成了有史以来金额最高的版权和解。今年 5 月，一些作者曾试图阻止该和解协议。此前法院裁定，Anthropic 使用书籍训练 AI 属于“合理使用”，但其对作品的盗版行为可能并非如此。反对和解的作者认为，律师费过高，而作者获得的赔偿过低。为了避免接受每部作品约 3,000 美元的赔偿，并希望通过单独诉讼寻求更高的赔偿，少数作者试图在截止日期后选择退出。
In her order, US District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín overruled objections to the settlement as lacking merit. She emphasized that about 95 percent of the class received notifications and approximately 91 percent of authors and publishers impacted have already filed claims. Only 350 class members opted out, while another 54 sought to object or filed late opt-out requests, Martínez-Olguín said. The high rate of participation suggested that most authors received timely notice of the distribution plan, agreed it was “fair,” and supported the settlement, Martínez-Olguín wrote. She also noted that the $3,000-per-work payouts were “four times the minimum statutory damages.”
美国地方法官 Araceli Martínez-Olguín 在裁决书中驳回了对和解协议的异议，称其缺乏法律依据。她强调，约 95% 的集体诉讼成员收到了通知，约 91% 受影响的作者和出版商已经提交了索赔申请。Martínez-Olguín 表示，只有 350 名成员选择退出，另有 54 人试图提出异议或提交了逾期退出申请。Martínez-Olguín 写道，高参与率表明大多数作者及时收到了分配计划的通知，认为其“公平”并支持该和解。她还指出，每部作品 3,000 美元的赔偿金是“法定最低赔偿额的四倍”。
Lawyers fees, plaintiffs awards cut
律师费及原告奖励被削减
Although Martínez-Olguín approved the total settlement amount, she reduced both lawyers’ fees and the requested awards for the three authors who represented the class in the litigation. Lawyers originally asked for 20 percent of the settlement in fees, requesting $300 million. Ahead of Martínez-Olguín’s ruling, that percentage was reduced to 12.5, with the total fees requested amounting to approximately $187 million. The judge ruled that 12.5 percent was too high, however, cutting fees down to less than 7 percent of the settlement fund, which is about $101 million. Some of those fees include future work that lawyers will do to distribute funds, and some authors argued that lawyers’ projections for time spent were alarmingly inflated.
尽管 Martínez-Olguín 批准了总和解金额，但她削减了律师费以及代表集体诉讼的三位作者所要求的奖励。律师最初要求提取和解金的 20% 作为费用，即 3 亿美元。在 Martínez-Olguín 作出裁决前，这一比例降至 12.5%，总费用约为 1.87 亿美元。然而，法官裁定 12.5% 仍然过高，将费用削减至和解基金的 7% 以下，即约 1.01 亿美元。部分费用涵盖了律师未来分配资金的工作，一些作者认为律师对所耗时间的预估存在惊人的夸大。
Acknowledging these concerns, Martínez-Olguín wrote in a footnote that the court decided to take “an additional step to protect the interests of the Class.” Once payouts have been finalized, lawyers will be required to file a post-distribution accounting, and if their fees are less, then the court “may reduce” them, Martínez-Olguín said. Although the settlement likely relieves the three authors who spent years defending their works and 506,194 works from potential class members, the lead plaintiffs are likely disappointed by a decision to reduce their requested service awards from $50,000 to $15,000. But Martínez-Olguín said that the higher amount was “unreasonable,” despite authors spending substantial time and resources on both litigation and the settlement negotiation. Without a sign that authors may face retaliation for filing the lawsuit, the judge ruled that lower awards were due.
针对这些担忧，Martínez-Olguín 在脚注中写道，法院决定采取“额外措施来保护集体成员的利益”。Martínez-Olguín 表示，一旦赔付完成，律师将被要求提交分配后的账目，如果其实际费用较低，法院“可能会削减”其费用。虽然该和解协议可能让三位多年来捍卫其作品的作者以及 506,194 部作品的潜在集体成员感到宽慰，但首席原告对将他们的服务奖励从 5 万美元削减至 1.5 万美元的决定感到失望。然而，Martínez-Olguín 表示，尽管作者在诉讼和和解谈判中投入了大量时间和资源，但更高的金额是“不合理的”。由于没有迹象表明作者会因提起诉讼而面临报复，法官裁定应给予较低的奖励。
In a statement to Reuters, lead plaintiffs said that the settlement “brings us one step closer to real accountability for Anthropic and puts all AI companies on notice they can’t shortcut the law or override creators’ rights.” It’s unlikely, but still possible, that authors may receive more than $3,000 per work. “If any funds remain in the Settlement Fund after all Valid Claims are paid, the Parties anticipate a redistribution of the remaining funds to Settlement Class Members unless it is economically infeasible to do so,” Martínez-Olguín said.
在给路透社的一份声明中，首席原告表示，该和解协议“使我们离让 Anthropic 承担真正责任更近了一步，并向所有 AI 公司发出警告：他们不能走法律捷径或凌驾于创作者权利之上。”虽然可能性不大，但作者仍有可能获得超过每部作品 3,000 美元的赔偿。Martínez-Olguín 表示：“如果在支付所有有效索赔后和解基金中仍有剩余资金，各方预计会将剩余资金重新分配给集体成员，除非在经济上不可行。”
Authors’ lawyers celebrated the judge’s approval, writing in a press release that “rightsholders came together to call foul” on Anthropic’s piracy and describing support for the settlement among them as “overwhelming.” Anthropic also seems happy to be done arguing about the settlement. In a statement provided to Ars, Anthropic’s deputy general counsel, Aparna Sridhar, said that Anthropic is glad the case’s landmark ruling established that its AI training was fair use and is happy that most rightsholders have already filed claims. “We are pleased that more than 91 percent of authors and publishers covered by the settlement have claimed their share of the payment, and we’re looking forward to bringing this matter to a close,” Sridhar said.
作者方的律师对法官的批准表示庆祝，并在新闻稿中写道，“权利持有人团结一致，对 Anthropic 的盗版行为提出了抗议”，并称他们对和解协议的支持是“压倒性的”。Anthropic 对结束关于和解的争论也感到高兴。Anthropic 副总法律顾问 Aparna Sridhar 在提供给 Ars 的声明中表示，Anthropic 很高兴该案的里程碑式裁决确立了其 AI 训练属于合理使用，并对大多数权利持有人已经提交索赔感到欣慰。“我们很高兴超过 91% 的受和解协议覆盖的作者和出版商已经领取了他们的赔偿份额，我们期待着结束此事，”Sridhar 说道。
Anthropic blocked last-minute opt-outs
Anthropic 阻止了最后一刻的退出申请
For every opt-out granted, Anthropic risks facing separate litigation on what Martínez-Olguín said remains a complex case for courts to assess. It makes sense then that Anthropic was motivated to block delayed requests to opt out. Some authors who opposed the settlement argued that they did not receive timely notices, the opt-out period was too short, and the settlement awards to authors were unacceptable, because the Copyright Act allowed for potentially higher statutory damages. Martínez-Olguín confirmed that 350 class members successfully opted out of the settlement, but dozens of objections were denied, as were at least nine authors’ direct requests to opt out after the March 30 截止日期.
每批准一个退出申请，Anthropic 就面临着可能遭遇单独诉讼的风险，正如 Martínez-Olguín 所言，这对于法院评估来说仍然是一个复杂的案件。因此，Anthropic 有动力阻止延迟的退出请求是合乎逻辑的。一些反对和解的作者认为，他们没有及时收到通知，退出期太短，且给作者的和解赔偿不可接受，因为《版权法》允许获得可能更高的法定赔偿。Martínez-Olguín 确认有 350 名集体成员成功退出了和解，但数十项异议被驳回，至少有 9 名作者在 3 月 30 日截止日期后直接提出的退出请求也被驳回。
Ultimately, Martínez-Olguín overruled most of the objections and denied most of the late opt-out requests. The court only accepted two late opt-out requests from authors who showed “excusable neglect” in failing to meet the deadline, Martínez-Olguín said. The two were co-authors who did not receive settlement notices. One author filed an opt-out request a few days late, which was granted, while the other request was granted after a much longer delay, due to the author suffering a stroke. That author also garnered the court’s sympathy by noting that she “lives in Mexico, speaks Spanish, was not able to understand the class notice, and asserts no Spanish translation was provided.” One of the last authors to try to escape the settlement at the last minute was Donald Passman.
最终，Martínez-Olguín 驳回了大部分异议，并拒绝了大多数逾期退出请求。Martínez-Olguín 表示，法院仅接受了两名因“可原谅的疏忽”而未能在截止日期前提交申请的作者的逾期退出请求。这两位是未收到和解通知的合著者。其中一位作者晚了几天提交退出请求并获得批准，而另一位作者在经历了更长时间的延误后获得批准，原因是她中风了。该作者还通过指出她“居住在墨西哥，讲西班牙语，无法理解集体诉讼通知，且声称没有提供西班牙语翻译”而赢得了法院的同情。最后时刻试图逃离和解协议的作者之一是 Donald Passman。