Education
Federal Court Rules AI Training with Copyrighted Books Fair Use — Campus Technology
Federal Court Rules AI Training with Copyrighted Books Fair Use
A federal judge has ruled that artificial intelligence company Anthropic did not violate copyright law when it used copyrighted books to train its Claude chatbot without author consent, but ordered the company to face trial on allegations it used pirated versions of the books.
Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued the ruling Monday in a lawsuit filed by three authors against Anthropic. The decision represents a significant development for AI companies facing copyright litigation over their training methods.
Court’s Fair Use Determination
Alsup ruled that Anthropic’s use of copyrighted books to train its large language models constituted fair use under copyright law, a finding evocative of the early-2000s battle between Google and The Author’s Guild over the Google Books book-scanning project. The judge compared Anthropic’s practice to an aspiring writer reading copyrighted texts “not to race ahead and replicate or supplant” those works, “but to turn a hard corner and create something different.”
The lawsuit was filed by authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson, who alleged Anthropic used their work without consent in what they termed “largescale theft.”
Had Judge Alsup ruled that using copyrighted books for AI training constituted copyright infringement, it would have fundamentally altered the AI development landscape. Companies would likely have faced two primary paths: either negotiate expensive licensing deals with publishers and authors for training data, or pivot to using only public domain materials and original content.
The licensing approach would have created significant barriers to entry for smaller AI companies while potentially benefiting established players with deeper pockets. We might have seen the emergence of massive content licensing consortiums, similar to how music streaming services negotiate with record labels. Publishers and authors would have gained substantial leverage and new revenue streams from AI companies.
Alternatively, if companies had been forced to rely primarily on public domain content, AI models might have developed differently — potentially with knowledge cutoffs much earlier in history, or with notable gaps in contemporary understanding. This could have led to a bifurcated AI ecosystem where some models had access to modern knowledge through expensive licensing while others remained limited to older, freely available content.
Piracy Allegations to Proceed
While dismissing the copyright infringement claims, Alsup ordered Anthropic to face trial on allegations it knowingly obtained copies of more than 7 million books from piracy websites. The company later purchased copies of some books, according to court documents.
The judge expressed skepticism about the company’s piracy defense, stating he doubted “any accused infringer could ever meet its burden of explaining why downloading source copies from pirate sites that it could have purchased or otherwise accessed lawfully was itself reasonably necessary to any subsequent fair use.”
“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,” Alsup added.
Company Response
Anthropic said in a statement it was pleased the court recognized that using published works to train large language models was consistent with copyright laws “in enabling creativity and fostering scientific progress.”
The company disagreed with the decision to proceed to trial regarding its “acquisition of a subset of books and how they were used,” and said it was “evaluating all options.”
If the court had also dismissed the piracy allegations, it would have essentially given AI companies a green light to acquire training data through any means necessary, as long as the ultimate use qualified as fair use. This could have established a problematic precedent where the method of obtaining copyrighted material became irrelevant if the end use was deemed transformative.
Such an outcome might have encouraged more aggressive data acquisition practices across the industry and potentially undermined traditional content markets. It could have created a situation where piracy became a de facto acceptable method for obtaining training data, as long as companies could argue fair use for their AI systems.
Background
According to court documents, after internal concerns arose about using pirated books, Anthropic hired former Google Books executive Tom Turvey to obtain “all the books in the world” while avoiding legal issues.
Rather than seeking commercial licensing agreements with publishers, the company purchased millions of print books from retailers, many used, then scanned them into digital form. Alsup noted the company could have hired staff to create original content for training but that would have “required spending more.”
The authors who filed the lawsuit said Anthropic’s actions made “a mockery of its lofty goals.”
About the Author
John K. Waters is the editor in chief of a number of Converge360.com sites, with a focus on high-end development, AI and future tech. He’s been writing about cutting-edge technologies and culture of Silicon Valley for more than two decades, and he’s written more than a dozen books. He also co-scripted the documentary film Silicon Valley: A 100 Year Renaissance, which aired on PBS. He can be reached at [email protected].
Education
Blunkett urges ministers to use ‘incredible sensitivity’ in changing Send system in England | Special educational needs
Ministers must use “incredible sensitivity” in making changes to the special educational needs system, former education secretary David Blunkett has said, as the government is urged not to drop education, health and care plans (EHCPs).
Lord Blunkett, who went through the special needs system when attending a residential school for blind children, said ministers would have to tread carefully.
The former home secretary in Tony Blair’s government also urged the government to reassure parents that it was looking for “a meaningful replacement” for EHCPs, which guarantee more than 600,000 children and young people individual support in learning.
Blunkett said he sympathised with the challenge facing Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, saying: “It’s absolutely clear that the government will need to do this with incredible sensitivity and with a recognition it’s going to be a bumpy road.”
He said government proposals due in the autumn to reexamine Send provision in England were not the same as welfare changes, largely abandoned last week, which were aimed at reducing spending. “They put another billion in [to Send provision] and nobody noticed,” Blunkett said, adding: “We’ve got to reduce the fear of change.”
Earlier Helen Hayes, the Labour MP who chairs the cross-party Commons education select committee, called for Downing Street to commit to EHCPs, saying this was the only way to combat mistrust among many families with Send children.
“I think at this stage that would be the right thing to do,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. “We have been looking, as the education select committee, at the Send system for the last several months. We have heard extensive evidence from parents, from organisations that represent parents, from professionals and from others who are deeply involved in the system, which is failing so many children and families at the moment.
“One of the consequences of that failure is that parents really have so little trust and confidence in the Send system at the moment. And the government should take that very seriously as it charts a way forward for reform.”
A letter to the Guardian on Monday, signed by dozens of special needs and disability charities and campaigners, warned against government changes to the Send system that would restrict or abolish EHCPs.
Labour MPs who spoke to the Guardian are worried ministers are unable to explain essential details of the special educational needs shake-up being considered in the schools white paper to be published in October.
Downing Street has refused to rule out ending EHCPs, while stressing that no decisions have yet been taken ahead of a white paper on Send provision to be published in October.
Keir Starmer’s deputy spokesperson said: “I’ll just go back to the broader point that the system is not working and is in desperate need of reform. That’s why we want to actively work with parents, families, parliamentarians to make sure we get this right.”
after newsletter promotion
Speaking later in the Commons, Phillipson said there was “no responsibility I take more seriously” than that to more vulnerable children. She said it was a “serious and complex area” that “we as a government are determined to get right”.
The education secretary said: “There will always be a legal right to the additional support children with Send need, and we will protect it. But alongside that, there will be a better system with strengthened support, improved access and more funding.”
Dr Will Shield, an educational psychologist from the University of Exeter, said rumoured proposals that limit EHCPs – potentially to pupils in special schools – were “deeply problematic”.
Shield said: “Mainstream schools frequently rely on EHCPs to access the funding and oversight needed to support children effectively. Without a clear, well-resourced alternative, families will fear their children are not able to access the support they need to achieve and thrive.”
Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “Any reforms in this space will likely provoke strong reactions and it will be crucial that the government works closely with both parents and schools every step of the way.”
Education
The Guardian view on special needs reform: children’s needs must be the priority as the system is redesigned | Editorial
Children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) must be supported through the education system to fulfil their potential as fully as possible. This is the bottom line for the families of the 1.6 million children with a recognised additional learning need in England, and all those who support them. It needs to be the government’s priority too.
There is no question that the rising number of children receiving extra help has placed pressure on schools and councils. There is wide agreement that the current trajectory is not sustainable. But if plans for reform are shaped around the aim of saving money by removing entitlements, rather than meeting the needs of children by improving schools, they should be expected to fail.
If ministers did not already know this, the Save Our Children’s Rights campaign launched this week ought to help. As it stands, there is no policy of restricting access to the education, health and care plans (EHCPs) that impose a legal duty on councils to provide specified support. But ministers’ criticisms of the adversarial aspects of the current system have led families to conclude that they should prepare for an attempt to remove their enforceable rights. Christine Lenehan, who advises the government, has indicated that the scope of EHCPs could be narrowed, while stressing a commitment to consultation. Tom Rees, who chairs the department for education’s specialist group, bluntly terms it “a bad system”.
Mr Rees’s panel has had its term extended until April. The education select committee will present the conclusions of its inquiry into the Send crisis in the autumn. Both should be listened to carefully. But the education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, and her team also need to show that they are capable of engaging beyond the circle of appointed experts and parliamentarians. Parents can make their views known through constituency MPs. Their voices and perspectives need to be heard in Whitehall too.
This is a hugely sensitive policy area. There is nothing parents care more about than the opportunities provided to their children, and this concern is intensified when those children have additional needs. Some positive steps have been taken during Labour’s first year. Increased capital spending on school buildings should make a difference to in-house provision, which relies on the availability of suitable spaces. Ministers are right, too, to focus on teacher training, while inclusion has been given greater prominence in the inspection framework. As with the NHS, there is a welcome emphasis on spreading best practice.
But big questions remain. Families are fearful that accountability mechanisms are going to be removed, and want to know how the new “inclusive mainstream” will be defined and judged. Councils are concerned about what happens to their £5bn in special needs budget deficits, when the so-called statutory override expires in 2028. The concerning role of private equity in special education – which mirrors changes in the children’s social care market – also needs addressing.
Schools need to adapt so that a greater range of pupils can be accommodated. The issue is how the government manages that process. The hope must be that the lesson ministers take from their failure on welfare is that consultation on highly sensitive changes, affecting millions of lives, must be thorough. In order to make change, they must build consensus.
-
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Education
How AI is Transforming Education in Africa
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping industries across the globe, and education in Africa is no exception. From personalized learning platforms to AI-driven teacher training, the continent is witnessing a surge in innovative solutions tackling longstanding challenges. In this Q&A Insights piece, we dive into how AI is revolutionizing education, addressing questions from our iAfrica community about its impact, opportunities, and hurdles.
What are the biggest challenges in African education that AI can address?
Africa’s education sector faces issues like limited access to quality resources, teacher shortages, and diverse linguistic needs. AI can bridge these gaps in practical ways. For instance, AI-powered platforms like Eneza Education provide mobile-based learning in local languages, reaching students in remote areas with affordable, interactive content. Adaptive learning systems analyze student performance to tailor lessons, ensuring kids in overcrowded classrooms get personalized attention. AI also supports teacher training through virtual simulations, helping educators refine skills without costly in-person workshops.
“AI can democratize education by making high-quality resources accessible to students in rural areas.” – Dr. Aisha Mwinyi, EdTech Researcher
How is AI being used to improve access to education?
Access is a critical issue, with millions of African children out of school due to distance, poverty, or conflict. AI is stepping in with scalable solutions. Chatbots and virtual tutors, like those developed by Ustad Mobile, deliver bite-sized lessons via SMS or WhatsApp, working on basic phones for low-income communities. In Nigeria, uLesson uses AI to stream offline-capable video lessons, bypassing unreliable internet. These tools ensure learning continues in areas with limited infrastructure, from refugee camps to rural villages.
Can AI help with language barriers in education?
Absolutely. Africa’s linguistic diversity—over 2,000 languages—creates unique challenges. AI-driven translation tools, such as those integrated into Kolibri by Learning Equality, adapt content into local languages like Swahili, Yoruba, or Amharic. Speech-to-text and text-to-speech systems also help non-literate learners engage with digital materials. These innovations make education inclusive, especially for marginalized groups who speak minority languages.
What are some standout African AI education startups?
The continent is buzzing with homegrown talent. M-Shule in Kenya uses AI to deliver personalized SMS-based learning, focusing on primary school students. Chalkboard Education, operating in Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire, offers offline e-learning platforms for universities, using AI to track progress. South Africa’s Siyavula combines AI with open-source textbooks to provide math and science practice, serving millions of learners. These startups show Africa isn’t just adopting AI—it’s innovating with it.
What concerns exist about AI in education?
While the potential is huge, concerns linger. Data privacy is a big one—students’ personal information must be protected, especially in regions with weak regulations. There’s also the risk of over-reliance on tech, which could sideline human teachers. Affordability is another hurdle; AI solutions must be low-cost to scale. Experts emphasize the need for ethical AI frameworks, like those being developed by AI4D Africa, to ensure tools are culturally relevant and equitable.
“We must balance AI’s efficiency with the human touch that makes education transformative.” – Prof. Kwame Osei, Education Policy Expert
How can policymakers support AI in education?
Policymakers play a pivotal role. Investing in digital infrastructure—think affordable internet and device subsidies—is crucial. Governments should also fund local AI research, as seen in Rwanda’s Digital Skills Program, which trains youth to build EdTech solutions. Public-private partnerships can scale pilots, while clear regulations on data use build trust. Our community suggests tax incentives for EdTech startups to spur innovation.
What’s next for AI in African education?
The future is bright but demands action. AI could power virtual reality classrooms, making immersive learning accessible in underfunded schools. Predictive analytics might identify at-risk students early, reducing dropout rates. But scaling these requires collaboration—between governments, startups, and communities. As iAfrica’s Q&A Forum shows, Africans are eager to shape this future, asking sharp questions and sharing bold ideas.
Got more questions about AI in education? Drop them in our Q&A Forum and join the conversation shaping Africa’s tech-driven future.
Got more questions about AI in education? Drop them in an email to ai@africa.com and join the conversation shaping Africa’s tech-driven future.
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
Kayak and Expedia race to build AI travel agents that turn social posts into itineraries
-
Jobs & Careers7 days ago
Mumbai-based Perplexity Alternative Has 60k+ Users Without Funding
-
Mergers & Acquisitions7 days ago
Donald Trump suggests US government review subsidies to Elon Musk’s companies
-
Funding & Business6 days ago
Rethinking Venture Capital’s Talent Pipeline
-
Jobs & Careers6 days ago
Why Agentic AI Isn’t Pure Hype (And What Skeptics Aren’t Seeing Yet)
-
Funding & Business4 days ago
Sakana AI’s TreeQuest: Deploy multi-model teams that outperform individual LLMs by 30%
-
Funding & Business7 days ago
From chatbots to collaborators: How AI agents are reshaping enterprise work
-
Jobs & Careers6 days ago
Astrophel Aerospace Raises ₹6.84 Crore to Build Reusable Launch Vehicle
-
Funding & Business6 days ago
Europe’s Most Ambitious Startups Aren’t Becoming Global; They’re Starting That Way
-
Jobs & Careers4 days ago
Ilya Sutskever Takes Over as CEO of Safe Superintelligence After Daniel Gross’s Exit