Sony Music and Warner Chappell Sue Anthropic Over Alleged Copyright Infringement

Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell Music have filed a major copyright lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Anthropic, accusing the Claude maker of illegally using thousands of copyrighted musical works to train its AI models.

The lawsuit was filed on August 28, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei and co-founder Benjamin Mann are also named as defendants.

Music Publishers Accuse Anthropic of Copyright Violations

According to the complaint, Anthropic allegedly obtained copyrighted material through large-scale torrenting, scraping and downloading before using the material in connection with its Claude AI systems.

The publishers claim the material included lyrics and other copyrighted musical compositions. They argue that Anthropic’s practices amount to widespread unauthorized copying and say the company benefited commercially from works created by songwriters and artists.

The complaint reportedly references well-known songs including “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough,” “All I Want for Christmas Is You,” “Eye of the Tiger,” “Livin’ on a Prayer,” “September,” “Hallelujah,” “Uptown Funk,” and Taylor Swift’s “Paper Rings.”

The publishers also allege that Claude can reproduce copyrighted lyrics in response to user prompts and that safeguards introduced by Anthropic can sometimes be bypassed through repeated prompting.

Billions of Dollars Could Be at Stake

Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell are seeking statutory damages of as much as $150,000 for each work that was willfully infringed.

They are also seeking as much as $25,000 for each alleged removal of copyright-management information. With potentially tens of thousands of copyrighted works involved, the financial exposure could reach billions of dollars.

The plaintiffs have requested a jury trial.

Another Major Legal Challenge for Anthropic

The lawsuit adds to a growing list of copyright disputes surrounding Anthropic and other AI companies.

Anthropic has already faced litigation from authors and music publishers over the use of copyrighted material in AI training. In a separate case involving authors, Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion settlement after a judge found that acquiring copyrighted books through piracy was not protected in the same way as the later use of lawfully obtained copies for AI training.

Music publishers including Universal Music Publishing Group, Concord Music Group and ABKCO have also pursued separate legal action against Anthropic. Another publisher, Round Hill Music, filed lawsuits against Anthropic and AI music company Suno earlier in August.

Anthropic Says It Will Defend Itself

Anthropic has rejected the publishers’ claims.

A company spokesperson said Anthropic disagrees with the allegations and intends to defend itself robustly in court.

The case could become another important test of how copyright law applies to artificial intelligence, particularly when companies use large collections of books, lyrics, music and other creative works to train generative AI systems.

For the music industry, the dispute is part of a much broader fight over whether AI companies should obtain licenses and compensate rights holders when copyrighted creative works are used to develop commercial AI products.

The outcome could have significant consequences for both the AI industry and the future economics of music publishing.