NEED TO KNOW
\nAuthors Andrea Bartz, Kirk Wallace Johnson and Charles Graeber were three of many authors whose books were pirated to train artificial intelligenceThe writers became named plaintiffs in a historic class action lawsuit, which alleged that AI company Anthropic infringed on copyrights by illegally downloading booksFollowing the case’s $1.5 billion settlement in September, Bartz, Johnson and Graeber spoke with PEOPLE about what comes next<\/p>\n
Author Andrea Bartz<\/a> still remembers the moment she learned that her work had been pirated to train artificial intelligence.<\/p>\n It was August 2023. That month, The Atlantic published a series of articles about pirated books that were being used to fuel generative-AI systems created by Bloomberg, Meta and other companies. One story included a database<\/a> that collected over 180,000 titles \u2014 from emerging authors to big names like Stephen King<\/a> and Jane Austen<\/a> \u2014 that had been downloaded by these companies without permission. The data set came to be known as \u201cBooks3.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI just remember typing in my name and my heart rate was picking up. Then when my books came up, I felt incredibly violated,\u201d Bartz, a thriller writer known for novels like We Were Never Here, tells PEOPLE. \u201cEvery one of my books takes years of work, as well as so much vulnerability and emotions. To have that intellectual property taken from me without consent \u2026 just felt like a different kind of violation.\u201d<\/p>\n Nonfiction writer Charles Graeber had two books recorded in the database, including his debut, The Good Nurse, which took him a decade to research and write.<\/p>\n \u201cI felt very small,\u201d he says. \u201cI’m one person and this is a huge tech company that didn’t feel the need to even notify me that they wanted or were using several books.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI tried to figure out what one person could do besides complain,\u201d he continues. \u201cThat’s when I started calling to see if there was a suit that we could join. It turns out there was.\u201d\n<\/p>\n Charles Graeber.<\/p>\n Robert Krivicich<\/p>\n That need for action led Bartz, Graeber and nonfiction writer Kirk Wallace Johnson (The Feather Thief) to become named plaintiffs in a first-of-its-kind class action lawsuit. In Bartz vs. Anthropic, the trio alleged that AI company Anthropic infringed on copyrights by downloading books from pirate websites, including Pirate Library Mirror (PiLiMi) and Library Genesis (LibGen).\n<\/p>\n In September 2025, Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion settlement<\/a>, in what\u2019s now the biggest copyright recovery in history. The settlement covers 482,460 books and will pay around $3,000 per work. Copied and original files of their books will also be destroyed and unable to be used for future commercial and licensing purposes.\n<\/p>\n Bartz, Graeber and Wallace Johnson didn\u2019t know each other prior to the lawsuit prepration. Fighting for authors\u2019 rights, however, brought them closer, especially as they treaded into uncharted territory.<\/p>\n \u201cWe’re all so different, but to be able to stand together and say this one thing is wrong and serve as precedent\u00a0\u2014 that was really important,\u201d Graeber says.<\/p>\n Throughout the lawsuit \u2014 which included in-person courtroom dates in California and depositions with lawyers representing Anthropic \u2014 the authors gained a clearer understanding of how tech companies utilize AI. Books are an essential component in training the software, as it requires \u201cunique, expressive, long-form content” to mimic the human voice, Graeber notes.<\/p>\n \u201cIt changed the way I think about the future,\u201d he says. \u201cFor the AI companies, I would think that would change the way they would think about authors, because they require our work even as they threaten to make our jobs impossible.\u201d\n<\/p>\n Kirk Wallace Johnson.<\/p>\n Marie-Josee Cantin Johnson<\/p>\n \u201cThere’s nothing to me that was more shocking \u2014 that the most valuable thing driving the largest economy in the world depends on books that we’re writing,\u201d Johnson adds.\n<\/p>\n Bartz was struck by the boldness of the theft, noting that internal communications from Anthropic showed blatant awareness of the piracy.<\/p>\n \u201cThere’s really no excuse, which is a part of why we ended up with the largest copyright settlement in the history of copyright law in the U.S.,\u201d she says. \u201cThis is sort of a first corrective step.\u201d\n<\/p>\n Bartz vs. Anthropic didn\u2019t fully end the practice of using books to train AI. In June 2025, Judge William Alsup ruled on summary judgement<\/a> that books could still be used without permission if they were acquired legally, and were considered fair use. That doesn’t thrill the plaintiffs, though.\n<\/p>\n \u201cWe write books to engage human minds and to connect with readers and the rest of humanity,\u201d Bartz says. \u201cThe implication that our work can just be fodder for an algorithm if a book of ours is legally purchased doesn’t sit right with any of us.\u201d<\/p>\n The case does remain wide-reaching, though. It\u2019s just one of several class action lawsuits<\/a> brought forth by authors against tech companies like Open AI<\/a>, following the publication of the “Books3” data set. Bartz says the settlement has helped remind other writers that they \u201care not powerless\u201d in the face of artificial intelligence.<\/p>\n \u201cWe’re seeing a lot of gratitude, a lot of surprise because it feels like AI is this tsunami, this runaway train,\u201d Bartz says. \u201cNow is the time to set those guidelines and to set up those regulations.\u201d\n<\/p>\n Andrea Bartz.<\/p>\n Savannah Lauren<\/p>\n Everyday people can also do their part in the fight against artificial intelligence. One way is being cognizant of how and when you\u2019re using it, like through Google\u2019s AI summary tool or bots like ChatGPT. But supporting creatives across all mediums is invaluable, the authors emphasize.<\/p>\n \u201cIf you want a world that has creators, where people can survive creating art, you have to support that actively,\u201d Graeber says. \u201cIt’s possible, but if we rely on the people that are creating the technology to do that for us, it won’t happen. We’ve seen that already.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s also crucial for affected authors in the Anthropic lawsuit to file their claims<\/a> for the settlement, Johnson notes, even if there is no single lawsuit that will serve as a \u201ccure-all\u201d solution.\n<\/p>\n