Anthropic sued for alleged unauthorized use of Elvis Presley songs in AI training

What the lawsuit alleges

The lawsuit, filed by the owners of Elvis Presley’s intellectual property rights, accuses Anthropic of using 274 of Presley’s songs to train its Claude AI models without authorization. The plaintiffs claim that Claude’s generated content adapts or copies Presley’s discography, including well-known tracks like "Can’t Help Falling in Love," "Don’t Be Cruel," "Return to Sender," and "(You’re the) Devil in Disguise."

The complaint describes Anthropic’s business model as reliant on "infringing copyrights at an unfathomable scale," alleging that users could request Claude to recreate or update Presley’s songs without proper licensing or consent.

Anthropic’s response and legal context

Anthropic has denied the allegations and stated it will defend the case. The company has faced multiple prior lawsuits over alleged copyright infringement, including cases from Sony Music Publishing, Warner Chappell Music, and Universal Music Group. In August, Sony and Warner Chappell accused Anthropic of conducting a "brazen campaign" of illegally scraping and downloading copyrighted works.

In July, Anthropic settled a $1.5 billion class-action lawsuit brought by authors who alleged the company downloaded pirated books for training data. Universal Music Group has also sued Anthropic twice, once in January and again in October 2023.

What the plaintiffs are seeking

The plaintiffs are demanding a permanent injunction to prevent Anthropic from using Presley’s songs in its training data. They are also seeking damages of up to $150,000 per infringed work, which could total $41.1 million based on the 274 songs cited in the lawsuit.

What this means

Lazyfounder analysis — our interpretation, not reported fact.

This lawsuit is the latest in a growing wave of legal challenges targeting AI companies over the use of copyrighted material for training models. For founders and operators, the case underscores the risks of relying on unlicensed data to build or scale AI systems. It also signals that rights holders—particularly in music, publishing, and entertainment—are increasingly aggressive in defending their intellectual property against unauthorized use. If the plaintiffs succeed, it could set a precedent for how AI companies approach data sourcing, potentially increasing costs or limiting access to training materials. Conversely, a ruling in Anthropic’s favor might embolden the industry to push back against claims of infringement, but the reputational and financial toll of prolonged litigation remains a risk.

Related on Lazyfounder

• Anthropic
• Universal Music Group
• More ai news
• Universal Music Group licenses catalog to AI gaming music service TYGER