Enterprise Solutions
Illegally AI: Apple & Anthropic Sued By Authors & Warner Bros Sues Midjourney
Updated on Tue, Sep 9, 2025
Share
Artificial intelligence!
Yes, we’re once again talking about AI technology—and it’s very likely that we’ll be talking about it for a long time.
AI, along with its subset—GenAI (generative artificial intelligence)—has revolutionized the world in recent years.
Ever since OpenAI’s ChatGPT walked into our lives in late November 2022, the world has become obsessed with GenAI technology, infusing its capabilities across diverse functions.
ChatGPT is a chatbot capable of carrying on conversations using natural language. Users could simply ask questions just as they would with their friends or peers and gather answers of variable length—from one-word answers to detailed, long-format essays.
What began with simple text-to-text prompts quickly evolved into tools that could generate audio, video, code, and more, from text. Nowadays, people with no technical knowledge can create entire mobile apps, music, movies, books, and a whole lot more, with simple instructions.
At the same time, the ability to create such content instantaneously has only been possible thanks to training. The training of AI models on existing human-written content, art, music, and code is what powers GenAI platforms’ prowess to produce such products.
This is why AI companies are tying up with publishing houses, content creators, photographers, musicians, and more.
However, problems arise when not all training materials are sourced legally—and this is exactly what numerous authors are alleging that AI company Anthropic and tech giant Apple are guilty of.
According to a proposed class action lawsuit filed in Northern California’s federal court, Apple has been using Books3, a large dataset of around 183,000 pirated books, to train Apple Intelligence, its GenAI platform.
Books3’s dataset has been used to train AI models such as Meta's LLaMA, and has played a key role in lawsuits against Meta and OpenAI for copyright infringement. It was taken down in 2023 following a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) request from the Danish anti-piracy group Rights Alliance.
The new lawsuit accuses Apple of using this dataset and the works of numerous authors without consent, credit, or compensation.
“Apple has not attempted to pay these authors for their contributions to this potentially lucrative venture,” reads an excerpt from a section titled ‘Factual Allegations’ in the filing. “Apple did not seek licenses to copy and use the copyrighted books provided to its models. Instead, it intentionally evaded payment by using books already compiled in pirated datasets.”
Neither Apple nor the plaintiffs provided a comment on the matter.
Anthropic looked to settle the class action copyright infringement lawsuit against it by informing a San Francisco judge that it is willing to pay at least $1.5 billion, plus interest.
Here too, authors accused the company of using their books to train its Claude chatbot.
As per the company's approximation, around 500,000 content pieces are included in the class action lawsuit, meaning that each Class Work will see an estimated gross recovery of $3,000. If the amount of Works exceeds 500,000, the company will cough up an additional $3,000 per piece.
The parties are still working to finalize the full Works List.
Anthropic plans to make the payment in four installments—$300 million five business days after the Court’s preliminary approval order; $300 million five business days after the Court’s final approval order; $450 million, plus interest, within twelve months of the Court’s preliminary approval; and $450 million, plus interest, within twenty-four months of the Court’s preliminary approval order.
Anthropic’s recompenses go beyond just monetary compensation—the company promises to “destroy the LibGen and PiLiMi datasets after the expiration of any litigation preservation or other court orders.”
However, as per the terms set forth by the company in this agreement, “Anthropic will receive a past release only for conduct up to August 25, 2025.” Meaning that it will be protected from lawsuits or claims for infringement committed before or up to August 25, 2025, and the deal does not apply to future claims.
“If approved, this landmark settlement will be the largest publicly reported copyright recovery in history, larger than any other copyright class action settlement or any individual copyright case litigated to final judgment,” reads the filing.
“The proposed settlement well surpasses other copyright recoveries, will provide meaningful compensation for each Class Work, and will set a precedent of AI companies paying for their use of pirated websites like Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror.”
“This result is nothing short of remarkable.
The authors moved the court to approve the settlement, having agreed to the deal in August, as their lawyer said, "This settlement sends a powerful message to AI companies and creators alike that taking copyrighted works from these pirate websites is wrong.”
It’s not just common folk who feel they’ve been wronged.
Media and entertainment conglomerate Warner Bros. Discovery is suing GenAI image-generating company Midjourney for stealing the production house’s works to generate images of Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Bugs Bunny, Scooby-Doo and other copyrighted characters owned by the studio.
Warner Bros also alleged that Midjourney knew it was engaging in illegal practices as it had previously blocked users from generating videos using infringed images—a ban that was lifted recently under the disguise of an “improvement.”
“Midjourney thinks it is above the law,” reads an excerpt from the complaint. “It sells a commercial subscription service, powered by AI technology, that was developed using illegal copies of Warner Bros. Discovery’s copyrighted works.”
“The service lets subscribers pick iconic Warner Bros. Discovery copyrighted characters and then reproduces, publicly displays and performs, and makes available for download infringing images and videos, and unauthorized derivatives, with every imaginable scene featuring those characters.”
As such, Warner Bros. Discovery is seeking unspecified damages and disgorgement of profits, as well as a curb on further infringements by Midjourney.
Midjourney did not comment on the matter.
Do you think AI companies should be imposed with stricter punishment for using copyrighted material to train their models?
Let us know in the comments below!
Yes, we’re once again talking about AI technology—and it’s very likely that we’ll be talking about it for a long time.
AI, along with its subset—GenAI (generative artificial intelligence)—has revolutionized the world in recent years.
Ever since OpenAI’s ChatGPT walked into our lives in late November 2022, the world has become obsessed with GenAI technology, infusing its capabilities across diverse functions.
ChatGPT is a chatbot capable of carrying on conversations using natural language. Users could simply ask questions just as they would with their friends or peers and gather answers of variable length—from one-word answers to detailed, long-format essays.
What began with simple text-to-text prompts quickly evolved into tools that could generate audio, video, code, and more, from text. Nowadays, people with no technical knowledge can create entire mobile apps, music, movies, books, and a whole lot more, with simple instructions.
At the same time, the ability to create such content instantaneously has only been possible thanks to training. The training of AI models on existing human-written content, art, music, and code is what powers GenAI platforms’ prowess to produce such products.
This is why AI companies are tying up with publishing houses, content creators, photographers, musicians, and more.
However, problems arise when not all training materials are sourced legally—and this is exactly what numerous authors are alleging that AI company Anthropic and tech giant Apple are guilty of.
Authors Vs. Apple
According to a proposed class action lawsuit filed in Northern California’s federal court, Apple has been using Books3, a large dataset of around 183,000 pirated books, to train Apple Intelligence, its GenAI platform.
Books3’s dataset has been used to train AI models such as Meta's LLaMA, and has played a key role in lawsuits against Meta and OpenAI for copyright infringement. It was taken down in 2023 following a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) request from the Danish anti-piracy group Rights Alliance.
The new lawsuit accuses Apple of using this dataset and the works of numerous authors without consent, credit, or compensation.
“Apple has not attempted to pay these authors for their contributions to this potentially lucrative venture,” reads an excerpt from a section titled ‘Factual Allegations’ in the filing. “Apple did not seek licenses to copy and use the copyrighted books provided to its models. Instead, it intentionally evaded payment by using books already compiled in pirated datasets.”
Neither Apple nor the plaintiffs provided a comment on the matter.
Authors Vs. Anthropic
Anthropic looked to settle the class action copyright infringement lawsuit against it by informing a San Francisco judge that it is willing to pay at least $1.5 billion, plus interest.
Here too, authors accused the company of using their books to train its Claude chatbot.
As per the company's approximation, around 500,000 content pieces are included in the class action lawsuit, meaning that each Class Work will see an estimated gross recovery of $3,000. If the amount of Works exceeds 500,000, the company will cough up an additional $3,000 per piece.
The parties are still working to finalize the full Works List.
Anthropic plans to make the payment in four installments—$300 million five business days after the Court’s preliminary approval order; $300 million five business days after the Court’s final approval order; $450 million, plus interest, within twelve months of the Court’s preliminary approval; and $450 million, plus interest, within twenty-four months of the Court’s preliminary approval order.
Anthropic’s recompenses go beyond just monetary compensation—the company promises to “destroy the LibGen and PiLiMi datasets after the expiration of any litigation preservation or other court orders.”
However, as per the terms set forth by the company in this agreement, “Anthropic will receive a past release only for conduct up to August 25, 2025.” Meaning that it will be protected from lawsuits or claims for infringement committed before or up to August 25, 2025, and the deal does not apply to future claims.
“If approved, this landmark settlement will be the largest publicly reported copyright recovery in history, larger than any other copyright class action settlement or any individual copyright case litigated to final judgment,” reads the filing.
“The proposed settlement well surpasses other copyright recoveries, will provide meaningful compensation for each Class Work, and will set a precedent of AI companies paying for their use of pirated websites like Library Genesis and Pirate Library Mirror.”
“This result is nothing short of remarkable.
The authors moved the court to approve the settlement, having agreed to the deal in August, as their lawyer said, "This settlement sends a powerful message to AI companies and creators alike that taking copyrighted works from these pirate websites is wrong.”
Warner Bros. Discovery Vs. Midjourney
It’s not just common folk who feel they’ve been wronged.
Media and entertainment conglomerate Warner Bros. Discovery is suing GenAI image-generating company Midjourney for stealing the production house’s works to generate images of Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Bugs Bunny, Scooby-Doo and other copyrighted characters owned by the studio.
Warner Bros also alleged that Midjourney knew it was engaging in illegal practices as it had previously blocked users from generating videos using infringed images—a ban that was lifted recently under the disguise of an “improvement.”
“Midjourney thinks it is above the law,” reads an excerpt from the complaint. “It sells a commercial subscription service, powered by AI technology, that was developed using illegal copies of Warner Bros. Discovery’s copyrighted works.”
“The service lets subscribers pick iconic Warner Bros. Discovery copyrighted characters and then reproduces, publicly displays and performs, and makes available for download infringing images and videos, and unauthorized derivatives, with every imaginable scene featuring those characters.”
As such, Warner Bros. Discovery is seeking unspecified damages and disgorgement of profits, as well as a curb on further infringements by Midjourney.
Midjourney did not comment on the matter.
Do you think AI companies should be imposed with stricter punishment for using copyrighted material to train their models?
Let us know in the comments below!
First published on Tue, Sep 9, 2025
Liked what you read? That’s only the tip of the tech iceberg!
Explore our vast collection of tech articles including introductory guides, product reviews, trends and more, stay up to date with the latest news, relish thought-provoking interviews and the hottest AI blogs, and tickle your funny bone with hilarious tech memes!
Plus, get access to branded insights from industry-leading global brands through informative white papers, engaging case studies, in-depth reports, enlightening videos and exciting events and webinars.
Dive into TechDogs' treasure trove today and Know Your World of technology like never before!
Disclaimer - Reference to any specific product, software or entity does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation by TechDogs nor should any data or content published be relied upon. The views expressed by TechDogs' members and guests are their own and their appearance on our site does not imply an endorsement of them or any entity they represent. Views and opinions expressed by TechDogs' Authors are those of the Authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of TechDogs or any of its officials. While we aim to provide valuable and helpful information, some content on TechDogs' site may not have been thoroughly reviewed for every detail or aspect. We encourage users to verify any information independently where necessary.
Loading comments...
