The lawsuit centers on how generative AI companies obtain and use written works to train large language models. Copyright holders have argued that some AI training pipelines relied on copying books without permission, while AI developers often contend that training is transformative and can qualify as fair use. According to the settlement site, this proposed class action involves claims that Anthropic used certain books without authorization, and it provides a process for eligible book copyright owners—those whose titles appear on Anthropic’s works list—to submit a claim with proof by March 23, 2026, for a payout that varies from the $35 million settlement fund. The case was filed to seek compensation and accountability for alleged unlicensed copying and use of protected books, reflecting a broader push by authors and publishers to enforce rights in the AI era. Its significance lies in what it signals to the industry: even without a final court ruling on whether specific training uses are lawful, companies may face substantial financial and operational pressure to document data provenance, negotiate licenses, and build compliance programs. This settlement also fits into a growing wave of similar disputes against AI and tech firms over training data sources, unfolding against the backdrop of U.S. copyright law (including the exclusive rights to reproduce and create derivative works) and the still-developing application of the fair-use doctrine to AI training, with potential ripple effects on how datasets are assembled, audited, and licensed across the generative AI market.