Lawsuit Filed Over AI Training Data Raises New Copyright Questions
A group of renowned authors has filed a lawsuit against Microsoft, alleging that the tech giant used pirated versions of their books to train its advanced AI language model, Megatron. Among the plaintiffs are Pulitzer Prize-winner Kai Bird, acclaimed essayist Jia Tolentino, and author Daniel Okrent, who argue that their works were exploited without consent to enhance the model’s ability to respond to human prompts.
What’s at the Heart of the Case?
At the core of the lawsuit is the claim that nearly 200,000 copyrighted books, many obtained from unauthorized sources, were used to train Megatron, a powerful AI model containing 530 billion parameters. The writers argue that the model’s ability to mimic writing styles, themes, and syntax is evidence of unlawful use of their intellectual property.
The lawsuit is part of a broader legal trend. In recent months, authors, journalists, and publishers have begun pushing back against the unlicensed use of their content by major tech companies including Microsoft, OpenAI, Meta, and Anthropic. These companies are accused of building and training AI systems on protected works without proper licensing.
Court Rulings Favor AI Firms—For Now
Adding complexity to the matter are recent court decisions. On June 23, a U.S. court ruled in favor of Anthropic, allowing it to train AI models on published books without needing explicit author permission. Just two days later, another ruling allowed Meta to proceed similarly, marking a significant shift in how courts may interpret copyright law in the age of AI.
These rulings could set powerful legal precedents, potentially undermining future cases brought by content creators—unless new legislation or interpretations of fair use emerge.
Authors Seek Compensation and Legal Injunction
The authors suing Microsoft are not only seeking to ban the company from future infringements, but also demanding up to $150,000 in damages per work used in the dataset. Their legal argument hinges on the assertion that AI-generated output is fundamentally built upon human-created works, and thus, the original authors deserve compensation when their content is used.
Conclusion: A Battle That Could Define AI’s Creative Limits
This lawsuit against Microsoft underscores the growing tension between AI innovation and intellectual property rights. While companies race to develop ever more capable models, creators are demanding protection and recognition for their work. As legal frameworks struggle to keep pace with technology, the outcomes of cases like this could have lasting implications for the future of content ownership in the age of AI.
