Skip to content
TEN Brief Ten verified stories a day 2026.09.01 KO

이 기사는 한국어로도 읽을 수 있습니다 →

Tech · 3 min read · Breaking

Sony, Warner and other publishers sue Anthropic (August 28, 2026) — up to $150,000 per song, CEO named

Sony Music Publishing, Warner Chappell Music and other music publishers — 35 plaintiffs by Korean reporting — sued Anthropic in California federal court on Friday, August 28, 2026, alleging it used tens of thousands of copyrighted compositions without permission to train its Claude models. Co-founders Dario Amodei and Benjamin Mann were named as defendants alongside the company. The complaint calls the conduct one of the largest and most blatant ongoing thefts of intellectual property in history and cites specific works including Mariah Carey's All I Want for Christmas Is You, Taylor Swift's Paper Rings, Ain't No Mountain High Enough and Eye of the Tiger. The publishers seek a jury trial, statutory damages of up to 150,000 dollars per infringed composition, and up to 25,000 dollars per alleged removal of copyright management information. Anthropic said it disagrees and will defend itself in court. The suit arrives while the company is reported to be preparing an IPO

A sunlit music library reading room at midday, shelves of bound sheet-music volumes and an open score on a wooden table

The three lines

  • Who — Sony Music Publishing, Warner Chappell and others (35 plaintiffs per Korean reporting), filed August 28
  • What — tens of thousands of compositions allegedly used for training. Amodei and Mann named personally
  • How much — up to $150,000 per infringed composition, plus up to $25,000 per CMI removal

Key questions

Why are Sony and Warner suing Anthropic?
**They allege Claude was trained on compositions they control, without permission.** Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell Music are not record labels — they are **publishers**, which means they administer the rights in **lyrics and musical compositions**, not in recordings. So this case is not about audio files; it is about **the works themselves**, which exist as text and notation and therefore sit squarely in the path of language-model training. The plaintiffs allege Anthropic obtained millions of pirated books via torrent, and that lyrics and sheet music for commercial songs were inside that corpus. Specific works named include **All I Want for Christmas Is You**, **Paper Rings**, **Ain't No Mountain High Enough** and **Eye of the Tiger**. Anthropic said it **disagrees with the publishers' claims and intends to defend itself robustly in court.**
How large could the damages be?
**The structure is up to $150,000 per work multiplied by tens of thousands of works.** The publishers seek two things: statutory damages of **up to 150,000 dollars per infringed composition**, and **up to 25,000 dollars for each alleged removal of copyright management information**. US statutory damages do not require proving actual loss, and the ceiling rises to 150,000 dollars per work where infringement is found **wilful**. Because the calculation is multiplicative, **the number of works is effectively the number.** The CMI element refers to rights and licensing markers attached to a work — stripping them while assembling a training corpus is alleged as a separate violation. One caution: **a demand is not an award.** The eventual figure depends on how many works are found infringed, whether wilfulness is established, and whether the case settles.
How serious is this for Anthropic?
**Three features make it heavier than earlier suits.** ① **The CEO is personally named** — Dario Amodei and co-founder Benjamin Mann are defendants alongside the company, a construction typically aimed at establishing wilfulness. ② **Timing** — reporting has repeatedly described Anthropic as preparing an IPO, and unresolved litigation becomes a disclosed risk factor in that process. ③ **The complaint targets an already-decided line.** In earlier book litigation, US courts accepted that training on **lawfully purchased** books can be fair use, while holding that **using pirated copies** was infringement — a finding that led to a large settlement. That is why this complaint emphasises torrents so heavily: it plants the case on the side of the line that already won. The boundary itself is covered in "What fair use means for AI training data."

On Friday, August 28, 2026, Sony Music Publishing, Warner Chappell Music and other music publishers sued Anthropic in California federal court. Korean reporting put the plaintiff count at 35.

The allegation compresses to one sentence: tens of thousands of compositions were used, without permission, to train Claude.

1. Who is suing, and over what

One distinction has to come first. Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell are not record labels.

TypeRights administeredSubject of this case
Record labelRecordings (masters)
PublisherLyrics and compositions

So the claim is not about audio files. It is about the works themselves, which exist as text and notation — and therefore land directly in the path of language-model training.

Named works include:

  • Mariah Carey — All I Want for Christmas Is You
  • Taylor Swift — Paper Rings
  • Ain't No Mountain High Enough
  • Eye of the Tiger

The plaintiffs allege Anthropic downloaded millions of pirated books via torrent and that lyrics and sheet music for commercial songs were inside that corpus. The complaint describes the conduct as one of the largest and most blatant ongoing thefts of intellectual property in history.

Anthropic said it disagrees with the publishers' claims and intends to defend itself robustly in court.

2. The damages structure

ClaimCeiling
Statutory damages per infringed compositionup to $150,000
Per removal of copyright management informationup to $25,000
Trial requestedJury

US statutory damages do not require proving actual loss, and the ceiling rises to 150,000 dollars per work where infringement is found wilful. Because the calculation multiplies, the number of works found infringed is effectively the number.

The second item, copyright management information (CMI), refers to the rights and licensing markers attached to a work. Stripping them while building a training corpus is alleged as a separate violation.

One caution belongs here: a demand is not an award. The eventual figure turns on how many works are found infringed, whether wilfulness is established, and whether the parties settle.

3. Why this suit is heavier than the last ones

FeatureDetailWhy it matters
Individuals namedDario Amodei (CEO), Benjamin Mann (co-founder)Naming individuals behind the corporate form targets wilfulness
TimingFiled amid IPO-preparation reportingUnresolved litigation becomes a disclosed risk factor
Legal theoryTorrents emphasised throughoutPlants the case on the side of the line that already won

The third row deserves the detail. In earlier book litigation, US courts split the question in two.

How the training data was obtainedCourt's treatment
Lawfully purchased booksFair use available
Pirated copiesInfringement — leading to a large settlement

That is why the word "torrent" recurs in this complaint. The plaintiffs are not trying to relitigate whether training is transformative. That argument has already been lost once. They are placing this case on the favourable side of a boundary that has already been drawn.

How that boundary was drawn is covered in "What fair use means for AI training data — why bought books count and downloaded ones do not."

4. Anthropic's August, as this page recorded it

  • August 26 — Q2 revenue of 11.6 billion dollars, ahead of OpenAI for the first time
  • August 26 — 2.6 billion dollars of Anthropic stake gains inside Salesforce's profit jump
  • August 27 — A court ruled the Pentagon's "supply chain risk" designation of Anthropic unlawful
  • August 28Music publishers file suit

A record quarter, a win against the government, and a major copyright case in the same month. For a company preparing to go public, those three point in three different directions.

5. What is still unresolved

  • Plaintiff count — 35 comes from Korean reporting and was not checked against the complaint.
  • Work count — The exact number behind "tens of thousands" was not confirmed from the filing.
  • Total damages — This page states no aggregate; the figures described are the per-work ceiling multiplied out.
  • Scope of defendants — Whether Benjamin Mann is named on all counts or some was not confirmed.
  • IPO — Timing and size have not been formally announced.

Sources

  1. TechCrunch — Sony Music, Warner sue Anthropic, alleging a 'brazen campaign' of intellectual property theft
  2. Axios — Sony, Warner sue Anthropic, alleging "blatant theft" of intellectual property
  3. Variety — Sony, Warner Sue Anthropic for Allegedly Illegally Training Claude
  4. Music Business Worldwide — Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell sue Anthropic in multi-billion dollar lawsuit
  5. Edaily — Sony and 35 others sue Anthropic over unauthorised training on lyrics and sheet music

Verification

Published
Last modified
Cross-check
Checked against 5 independent sources.
Unverified
  • The figure of 35 plaintiffs comes from Korean reporting and was not checked against the complaint
  • The exact number of compositions behind 'tens of thousands' was not confirmed from the filing
  • No aggregate damages figure is stated here; the totals described are the per-work ceiling multiplied out
  • Whether Benjamin Mann is named on all counts or only some was not confirmed
  • The timing and size of any Anthropic IPO have not been formally announced
Authoring
Reviewed by a person before publication. The full process is described in the Editorial.

Ten stories, once each morning

We send the three-line summaries only; the full pieces stay on the site. One-click unsubscribe, any time.

Related