
The information displayed in the AIM should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries.
US AI company Anthropic used 21 English-language books by Korean authors without permission to train its Claude chatbot, resulting in a US court ruling of copyright infringement. Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion in damages, with affected Korean authors eligible for compensation. The incident highlights AI-driven intellectual property violations.[AI generated]
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
Anthropic's AI system was trained on copyrighted books obtained without authorization, which constitutes a violation of intellectual property rights. This infringement has been legally recognized and resulted in a significant settlement, confirming that harm has occurred. The AI system's development and use directly led to this harm, fulfilling the criteria for an AI Incident. The article's focus is on the realized harm and legal consequences, not just potential or future risks, nor is it solely about responses or updates, so it is not Complementary Information. Therefore, the event is classified as an AI Incident due to the direct violation of copyright through AI training.[AI generated]