> Where can I find source that says Anthropic bought the pirated books afterwards? I haven't seen this in any official document.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.43...

> Also, do we know if the newer models were trained without the pirated books?

I'm pretty sure we do but I couldn't swear to it or quickly locate a source.

▲

rise_before_sun 7 days ago | parent [-]

Thanks for the link.

Among several places where judge mentions Anthropic buying legit copies of books it pirated, probably this sentence is most relevant: "That Anthropic later bought a copy of a book it earlier stole off the internet will not absolve it of liability for the theft but it may affect the extent of statutory damages."

But document does not say Anthropic bought EVERY book it pirated. Other sections in the document also don't explicitly say that EVERY pirated book was later purchased.

I stopped using Claude when this case came to light. If the newer Claude models don't use pirated books, I can resume using it.

When you say, "I'm pretty sure we do...", do you mean that pirated books were used, or were they not used?

	▲	gpm 7 days ago \| parent [-]
		> But document does not say Anthropic bought EVERY book it pirated Yeah, I wouldn't make this exact claim either. For instance it's probably safe to assume that the pirate datasets contain some books that are out of circulation and which Anthropic happened not to get a used copy of. They did happen to get every book published by any of the lead plaintiffs though, as a point towards them probably having pretty good coverage. And it does seem to have been an attempt to purchase "all" the books for reasonable approximate definitions of "all". > When you say, "I'm pretty sure we do...", do you mean that pirated books were used, or were they not used? I'm pretty sure pirated books were not used, but not certain, and I really don't remember when/why I formed that opinion.