“Zlibrary my beloved”: Anthropic staff chats extolling piracy cited in Sony suit
“Zlibrary my beloved”: Anthropic staff chats extolling piracy cited in Sony suit
“Zlibrary 我的挚爱”：Anthropic 员工推崇盗版的聊天记录被索尼诉讼引用
Some of the world’s leading music publishers think that Anthropic got off too light in a historic settlement where the Claude maker paid authors $1.5 billion after admitting to pirating more than 7 million books to train AI. 全球一些领先的音乐出版商认为，Anthropic 在此前的一项历史性协议中处罚过轻。在该协议中，这家 Claude 的开发商在承认盗版了超过 700 万本书籍用于训练 AI 后，向作者支付了 15 亿美元。
“$1.5 billion is obviously not a large enough settlement to deter infringing conduct by a company that has parlayed such mass infringement into a staggering $2-trillion-dollar valuation,” music publishers said in a lawsuit filed Friday. Music publishers suing Anthropic include Sony, EMI, and Warner Chappell. “对于一家通过大规模侵权行为获得了高达 2 万亿美元估值的公司来说，15 亿美元显然不足以阻止其侵权行为，”音乐出版商在周五提交的诉讼中表示。起诉 Anthropic 的音乐出版商包括索尼（Sony）、百代（EMI）和华纳查佩尔（Warner Chappell）。
They alleged that Anthropic’s illegal torrenting also included “thousands upon thousands” of their copyrighted musical compositions. Songwriters who are increasingly competing with AI-generated works in music charts are harmed by that piracy, their complaint said. 他们指控 Anthropic 的非法种子下载行为还涉及其版权保护下的“成千上万”部音乐作品。诉状称，那些在音乐排行榜上日益受到 AI 生成作品竞争的词曲作者正因此类盗版行为而受到损害。
Pirated books that Anthropic allegedly plans to keep “forever” to train AI include titles featuring the complete works of the Beatles, Taylor Swift’s “best” songs, and “VH1’s 100 Greatest Songs of Rock & Roll.” Anthropic 据称计划“永久”保留用于训练 AI 的盗版书籍，其中包括披头士乐队（The Beatles）的全集、泰勒·斯威夫特（Taylor Swift）的“精选”歌曲，以及“VH1 评选的 100 首最伟大的摇滚歌曲”等内容。
Without an injunction ending the improper AI training, Anthropic will continue to violate music copyrights—while improperly substituting artists in their markets by reproducing song lyrics verbatim and by generating “new” songs that mimic the “heart” of their most popular works, publishers alleged. 出版商指控称，如果不发布禁令终止这种不当的 AI 训练，Anthropic 将继续侵犯音乐版权，同时通过逐字复制歌词以及生成模仿其最受欢迎作品“精髓”的“新”歌，在市场上不当地替代艺术家。
For example, Anthropic may rely on songbooks or sheet music to respond to prompts asking Claude to change Eminem lyrics into a song written in “Beyonce’s style.” 例如，Anthropic 可能会利用歌词集或乐谱来响应用户的提示，要求 Claude 将阿姆（Eminem）的歌词改写成“碧昂丝（Beyonce）风格”的歌曲。
“It’s a brazen campaign of illegally torrenting, scraping, and downloading copyrighted works on a massive scale in order to develop, operate, and reap enormous profits,” music publishers alleged. “这是一场厚颜无耻的运动，通过大规模非法种子下载、抓取和下载受版权保护的作品，以进行开发、运营并获取巨额利润，”音乐出版商指控道。
Sony resurfaces Anthropic staff chats
索尼翻出 Anthropic 员工聊天记录
Anthropic’s “mass campaign of illegal torrenting” began in July 2021, when Anthropic co-founder Benjamin Mann “personally used BitTorrent to unlawfully download and upload via torrenting millions of pirated books” from Library Genesis (LibGen), a controversial pirate library. Anthropic 的“大规模非法种子下载运动”始于 2021 年 7 月，当时 Anthropic 联合创始人本杰明·曼恩（Benjamin Mann）“亲自使用 BitTorrent 从备受争议的盗版图书馆 Library Genesis (LibGen) 非法下载并上传了数百万本盗版书籍”。
Dario Amodei, Anthropic co-founder and CEO, allegedly approved the torrenting, and both he and Mann are named individually as defendants in music publishers’ lawsuit. Anthropic 联合创始人兼首席执行官达里奥·阿莫代（Dario Amodei）据称批准了这些种子下载行为，他和曼恩两人均被音乐出版商列为诉讼的个人被告。
By the end of 2021, though, the FBI had shut down LibGen, the complaint noted, “but not before online pirates copied its contents to create a new library,” named “Z-Library.” 诉状指出，到 2021 年底，联邦调查局（FBI）关闭了 LibGen，“但在此之前，网络盗版者已经复制了其内容并创建了一个名为‘Z-Library’的新图书馆。”
And although Z-Library also got shut down quickly, internal messages revealed in the book authors’ fight showed that Anthropic got access to a copy of the copy through the “Pirate Library Mirror” (PiLiMi), the lawsuit said. 诉讼称，尽管 Z-Library 也很快被关闭，但在图书作者的诉讼中披露的内部信息显示，Anthropic 通过“海盗图书馆镜像”（PiLiMi）获取了该副本的副本。
Mann is accused of directing employees to torrent PiLiMi soon after it became available, messaging colleagues that the mirror dropped “just in time!” Responding, an Anthropic staffer wrote back, “zlibrary my beloved.” 曼恩被指控在 PiLiMi 可用后立即指示员工通过种子下载该镜像，并向同事发消息称该镜像出现得“正是时候！”对此，一名 Anthropic 员工回复道：“zlibrary 我的挚爱。”
Music publishers pointed to these comments as proof that Anthropic extolled the use of piracy and relied on torrenting to quickly access new training data. 音乐出版商指出，这些评论证明了 Anthropic 推崇使用盗版，并依赖种子下载来快速获取新的训练数据。
In total, they alleged that crawling through LibGen and PiLiMi’s non-confidential catalogs showed “bibliographic metadata like title, author, and ISBN” that indicated that “Anthropic torrented at least hundreds of books containing sheet music and song lyrics to musical compositions” owned by publishers suing. 他们总共指控称，通过抓取 LibGen 和 PiLiMi 的非机密目录，发现了“标题、作者和 ISBN 等书目元数据”，这表明“Anthropic 至少通过种子下载了数百本包含乐谱和歌词的书籍”，而这些作品均属于起诉的出版商。
Through discovery, publishers claim they will reveal the “full extent” of Anthropic’s torrenting, the complaint said. 诉状称，出版商声称将通过证据开示程序揭露 Anthropic 种子下载行为的“全部范围”。
Publishers suspect Claude trained on hit songs
出版商怀疑 Claude 使用热门歌曲进行训练
Publishers acknowledged that Anthropic denies using any of the books that they torrented from LibGen and PiLiMi to train commercial Claude AI models. 出版商承认，Anthropic 否认使用从 LibGen 和 PiLiMi 下载的任何书籍来训练商业化的 Claude AI 模型。
However, they claimed that Anthropic’s statements depend on how “training” is defined, and they think that if the court traces Anthropic’s steps back far enough, it may reveal that commercial models were at some point trained on pirated works. 然而，他们声称 Anthropic 的声明取决于如何定义“训练”，他们认为如果法院对 Anthropic 的步骤进行足够深入的追溯，可能会发现商业模型在某个阶段确实使用了盗版作品进行训练。
As they explained: “Often, AI development includes a ‘pretraining’ phase where one AI model may train on ‘synthetic data’ created by another AI model or receive other behavioral feedback from another AI model. Anthropic has trained at least one of its commercially released Claude models using synthetic data created by a non-commercial AI model that was trained on text derived from LibGen and/or PiLiMi. Anthropic employed at least one non-commercial model that was trained on text derived from LibGen and/or PiLiMi to provide at least one commercial Claude model with reinforced feedback.” 他们解释道：“通常，AI 开发包括一个‘预训练’阶段，其中一个 AI 模型可能会在另一个 AI 模型创建的‘合成数据’上进行训练，或从另一个 AI 模型接收其他行为反馈。Anthropic 至少有一个商业发布的 Claude 模型是使用由非商业 AI 模型创建的合成数据进行训练的，而该非商业模型本身就是基于源自 LibGen 和/或 PiLiMi 的文本进行训练的。Anthropic 使用了至少一个基于 LibGen 和/或 PiLiMi 文本训练的非商业模型，为至少一个商业 Claude 模型提供强化反馈。”
Additionally, their complaint noted that recently unsealed documents from the book authors’ case “revealed that Anthropic exploits the pirated books it illegally torrented from LibGen in connection with its guardrails.” 此外，他们的诉状指出，图书作者案件中最近解封的文件“揭示了 Anthropic 利用其从 LibGen 非法下载的盗版书籍来完善其安全护栏（guardrails）。”
For example, in one filing, an Anthropic witness testified that Anthropic stopped training large language Models (LLMs) on LibGen but continued using the LibGen dataset to see if long strings of text in outputs too closely matched source text. 例如，在一份文件中，一名 Anthropic 的证人作证称，Anthropic 停止了在 LibGen 上训练大语言模型（LLM），但继续使用 LibGen 数据集来检查输出中的长文本字符串是否与源文本过于相似。
A spokesperson for Anthropic provided Ars with a statement that seems to suggest that music publishers are grasping at straws by digging through book authors’ settled complaint. Anthropic 的一位发言人向 Ars 提供了一份声明，似乎暗示音乐出版商通过挖掘图书作者已和解的诉状是在“抓救命稻草”。
“This is the third lawsuit from the same lawyers, recycling allegations from cases already before the courts,” Anthropic’s spokesperson said. “Training generative AI models is a transformative fair use—as the court held in Bartz—and we will defend ourselves robustly.” “这是同一批律师提起的第三起诉讼，重复利用了已经在法院审理中的案件的指控，”Anthropic 发言人表示。“训练生成式 AI 模型是一种转换性合理使用——正如法院在 Bartz 案中所裁定的那样——我们将坚决捍卫自己。”
Songwriters allegedly harmed by AI songs
词曲作者声称受到 AI 歌曲的伤害
Anthropic’s statement neglects to mention that the fair use ruling hinged on book authors’ inability to prove market harms or that AI tools had substituted them in their markets. Anthropic 的声明忽略了提到，该合理使用裁决的关键在于图书作者无法证明市场损害，也无法证明 AI 工具在市场上替代了他们。
Only Anthropic knows for sure how often users rely on Claude to generate substitutes for musicians’ songs, the lawsuit said. But publishers seem to think that music rightsholders may have a better chance at proving market harms than authors did. They’ve alleged that Anthropic publicly tracks the threat to song lyricists from its AI product. 诉讼称，只有 Anthropic 确切知道用户使用 Claude 生成音乐人歌曲替代品的频率。但出版商似乎认为，音乐版权所有者在证明市场损害方面可能比作者更有机会。他们指控称，Anthropic 正在公开追踪其 AI 产品对歌词作者构成的威胁。