“Publishers are essentially asking the court to define the contours of a licensing market for AI training where the threshold question of fair use remains unsettled,” wrote judge Eumi K. Lee in the decision. “The court declines to award publishers the extraordinary relief of a preliminary injunction based on legal rights … that have not yet been established.” Though the judge denied UMG’s injunction, a case will still move forward (though Billboard notes Anthropic is likely to try to get it dismissed following this ruling).
UMG initially sued Anthropic in 2023, accusing the company of violating copyrights to its works to train its Claude AI model; Anthropic argued that this fell under “fair use.” Though that question is still unsettled, Judge Lee ruled that whatever harm the company may be causing UMG is not “irreversible,” and could be eventually mitigated financially if there is in fact damage. “As the case continues, we look forward to explaining why use of copyrighted material for training large language models aligns with fair use principles under copyright law,” a representative for Anthropic told Billboard in a statement.
It should be noted that UMG is not completely against AI, but just against this one company using its assets without paying them. Last October, the music company partnered with “ethical A.I. music company” KLAY, working together on a “pioneering commercial ethical foundational model for AI generated music that works in collaboration with the music industry and its creators.” That company’s product purportedly “will not compete with artists’ catalogs in traditional music services,” though it’s hard to believe that using AI music won’t replace some working musician somewhere.
