Anthropic’s Legal Battle Over Erroneous Citation

Anthropic's Legal Battle Over Erroneous Citation

Anthropic, a leading developer of artificial intelligence (AI) models, has admitted to using an erroneous citation in its ongoing legal battle with music publishers. The company’s lawyer acknowledged that the citation was created by Claude, Anthropic’s AI chatbot, and included in a filing made in a Northern California court.

Key Points

  • Error Acknowledgment: Anthropic’s manual citation check failed to detect the error and several others caused by Claude’s hallucinations. One of Anthropic’s lawyers stated, "We had no intention of deceiving anyone with it."

  • Legal Context: The admission follows accusations from lawyers representing Universal Music Group and other music publishers, who claimed that Anthropic’s expert witness, Olivia Chen, used Claude to cite fake articles in her testimony. Federal judge Susan van Keulen ordered Anthropic to respond to these allegations after they were raised during oral arguments.

  • Broader Implications: This lawsuit is part of a series of disputes between copyright owners and tech companies over the alleged misuse of their work for generative AI tools. Music publishers are seeking damages from major companies, including:

    • Google parent Alphabet Inc.
    • Meta Platforms Inc.
    • Amazon.com Inc.
    • Microsoft Corp.
    • OpenAI LLC
    • Baidu Inc.’s iQIYI unit

    These companies are accused of infringing on copyrights by training their AI systems on copyrighted songs without permission.

Anthropic’s Defense

  • Denial of Wrongdoing: Anthropic has denied any wrongdoing, asserting that its use of copyrighted material is fair under U.S. law, as it does not make copies or distribute them publicly without permission. However, the company acknowledged that its use could be considered infringement if it were not deemed fair under U.S. law.

  • Court Orders: In response to Chen’s alleged actions, Judge van Keulen ordered Anthropic to provide evidence showing whether any other experts used similar methods when citing sources for their testimony or reports related to this case or other copyright infringement claims against tech companies’ generative AI tools.

Testimony Details

  • Olivia Chen’s Testimony: Chen testified last month as an expert witness for Google parent Alphabet Inc.’s subsidiary DeepMind Technologies Ltd. She admitted to using Claude at least once while preparing her report but did not disclose how many times she had done so when questioned by Universal Music Group attorney Andrew Bartlett Jr.

  • Cross-Examination: Bartlett Jr. inquired whether Chen knew if anyone else at DeepMind Technologies Ltd. used similar methods when citing sources for reports related to the case.

This ongoing legal situation highlights the complexities and challenges surrounding the use of AI in generating content and the implications for copyright law.

FacebooktwitterlinkedinrssyoutubeFacebooktwitterlinkedinrssyoutube
FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *