Google Hit with New AI Training Lawsuit from Major Publishers
▼ Summary
– A class action lawsuit accuses Google of using copyrighted works from publishers and authors to train its Gemini AI platform without permission.
– The lawsuit alleges Google removed or altered copyright information to conceal that its AI models were trained on stolen materials.
– This case joins other pending lawsuits against AI companies, though two earlier California rulings favored AI companies, deeming such use “fair use.”
– Anthropic was fined $1.5 billion for pirating works for AI training, the largest U.S. copyright payout, with many authors opting out to pursue further action.
– The plaintiffs argue Google illegally copied books from its Google Books and Play store programs for AI training, despite only having permission for limited search use.
A major class action lawsuit has been filed against Google, alleging the tech giant unlawfully used copyrighted materials to train its Gemini AI platform. The plaintiffs, a coalition that includes Hachette, Cengage, Elsevier, and prominent author Scott Turow (along with S.C.R.I.B.E.), claim Google not only trained its AI on stolen content but also deliberately stripped or altered copyright information. According to the legal filing, this was done to “conceal that its Gemini Models were trained on stolen materials.”
This case joins a growing wave of litigation from publishers, authors, and other copyright holders targeting AI companies like Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic. While many similar lawsuits remain unresolved, two early rulings in California have favored the AI firms, concluding that using copyrighted works for training qualifies as fair use under U. S. copyright law. Notably, this legal framework has not been updated since before the internet existed.
However, the legal landscape is far from settled. In a separate case, Anthropic was hit with a $1.5 billion fine for pirating training materials, the largest penalty in U. S. copyright history. Roughly 500,000 writers became eligible for payments of at least $3,000 each, though many opted out of the settlement to preserve their right to pursue further action against AI training practices.
The California decisions do not necessarily set a binding precedent, as the issue is highly nuanced. The Google lawsuit was filed in the U. S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, giving a different judge the opportunity to weigh in on the fair use defense. This geographical shift could produce a different outcome.
The Google case is distinct because of the plaintiffs’ long-standing relationship with the company. Publishers and authors have historically provided Google with copyrighted books for the Google Books program, which allows users to search for short snippets and bibliographic data, not full texts. The lawsuit alleges that Google trained Gemini on copies of these books, as well as titles from the Google Play store, without permission. “Google illegally copied works from all these scope-limited programs for AI training, knowing it lacked authorization to do so,” the complaint states.
The plaintiffs also point to an internal Google document that reportedly warns that using copyrighted books for AI training could be “highly problematic for Google” and could expose the company to $10 billion to $100 billion in potential fines. Google has not yet responded to a request for comment.
(Source: TechCrunch)
