A group of companies and individuals who control Elvis Presley’s music catalog are taking Anthropic to court. They claim the AI company used 274 copyrighted Elvis songs, without permission, to train its Claude models. The lawsuit, filed last Friday in California, asks for statutory damages—up to $150,000 for each song. That adds up to about $41.1 million, plus requests for an injunction and the destruction of any unauthorized copies.
Who’s suing, and what are they mad about?
Authentic Brands Group, which manages a big chunk of Presley’s rights, is leading the charge. They’ve teamed up with other rights holders, trusts, and individuals. According to their complaint, Anthropic copied Elvis’s songs and lyrics, kept them in an internal database, and used them to train Claude’s newer versions—all without a license or any payment.
They name classic tracks like “Can’t Help Falling in Love,” “All Shook Up,” “Don’t Be Cruel,” “A Little Less Conversation,” and “Return to Sender.” The suit says Claude can churn out unauthorized versions of these songs—and the infringement keeps happening when users generate outputs.
The plaintiffs also accuse Anthropic of removing or tampering with copyright-management information and dodging protective measures. They’re seeking not just the $41.1 million for copyright infringement, but also $685,000 related to alleged circumvention of protections, plus another $6.85 million for allegedly removing copyright info. Altogether, that’s $48.6 million.
Anthropic fires back
Anthropic disagrees. Their spokesperson put it bluntly: “We disagree with the claims and intend to defend this case fully.” No court has ruled against Anthropic yet, so nothing’s been proven. The case will hinge on whether Anthropic had authorization, whether they actually used Elvis’s songs in training, and if any such use is protected under US copyright law—including whether it might fall under fair use.
Why this matters
The Elvis lawsuit adds another big name to the growing pile of creative industry lawsuits aimed at AI companies. It comes on the heels of previous music-publishing actions against Anthropic, which focused on song lyrics. According to the new complaint, Claude kept reproducing protected material even after Anthropic put safeguards in place following earlier cases.
For AI developers, the question is clear: Do they need to get licenses, pay fees, or offer opt-outs to use copyrighted content in training? For music rights holders, it’s about whether courts see using big song catalogs in AI training as direct copyright infringement—especially when the models spit out outputs that mimic the originals.
What the lawsuit wants
Specifically, the plaintiffs are asking the court to award up to $150,000 per song (that’s $41.1 million for 274 works), to permanently bar Anthropic from using Presley’s music, and to force Anthropic to destroy any unauthorized copies. They’re also asking for damages related to alleged removal or circumvention of copyright protections.
Richard Busch, the lead attorney, told Vulture that the plaintiffs are “deeply protective of these iconic songs.” The complaint really goes after Anthropic, painting them as having built their business model on widespread copyright infringement. But keep in mind—that’s the plaintiffs’ point of view, not a judge’s finding.
What happens now?
Anthropic will respond formally through the courts soon. The case, called ABE EPE LLC v. Anthropic, is just getting started. There’s been no ruling on the merits, and the damages and claims haven’t been decided.
How this shakes out could change how AI companies approach licensing music, and whether copyright holders get paid for both model training and outputs that look and sound like original songs.
