Anthropic, a company specializing in artificial intelligence, has reached a $1.5 billion agreement with rights holders of hundreds of thousands of books. This deal resolves a legal dispute that initially involved allegations of hacking but has since shifted to compensating authors and publishers for the unauthorized use of their works in training AI models. The agreement, however, has sparked a new debate over the ownership of rights and the timeline of their transfer. In early September, claimants received letters from JND Legal Administration, the entity managing the settlement, outlining the distribution of rights and the percentages each party is claiming. Most claimants will simply need to confirm the details, while others face "distribution discrepancies" that could delay their payments until the issues are resolved. The legal case, Bartz v. Anthropic, was approved by federal judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín on July 20, 2026. It involves 482,460 works that Anthropic retrieved from websites such as LibGen and Pirate Library Mirror, which were previously hosting pirated copies of books. While the agreement resolves the issue of pirated copies, it does not broadly prohibit the use of books for AI training. Each work is now eligible for $3,000 in compensation, but after deductions, the amount per title is approximately $2,203.56. According to the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA), payments for works where all rights holders agree on the distribution and have complete payment information should be made no later than November 15, 2026. A second distribution will follow after Anthropic’s final payment. Despite the return of rights, the files themselves remain accessible. Conflicts arise when authors discover that publishers are still claiming rights on books where the author believes the rights have been reverted. Some authors report that publishers are claiming 100% of the compensation on books where the default sharing model—50% to the author and 50% to the publisher—should apply. For non-educational books, the official portal uses this 50/50 split as a default, with each party dividing their share among co-authors or co-publishers as appropriate. However, this is not an absolute rule and is only used when no specific contract terms apply. The Authors Guild has confirmed that some publishers have mistakenly claimed 100% of the compensation instead of using the default 50/50 split. These errors are being corrected. Mary Rasenberger, director general of the Authors Guild, told TechCrunch that these issues should not be seen as an organized attempt to reduce the share authors receive, but rather as the result of flawed rights records and the complexity of the system. A key date in this discussion is August 10, 2022. According to the Authors Guild, authors whose rights were reverted before this date should receive 100% of the compensation. If the reversion occurred after this date, the former publisher may still have a valid claim if it held the rights at the time of the infringement. Writer Beware, an organization that provides resources for writers, reports that some agencies are claiming between 15% and 25% of the compensation on behalf of their clients. However, the Authors Guild clarifies that an agent is not automatically the holder of the work’s rights and cannot directly claim a share from the settlement. Any commission an agent might receive would be based on their agreement with the author. Additionally, some agencies have appeared as beneficiaries without actively filing a claim, due to errors in how payment details were processed by publishers. Educational books follow a different set of rules. They are not subject to the default 50/50 split, as some contracts grant publishers broader rights, including ownership of the copyright. The Authors Guild notes that some educational publishers are claiming a distribution based on the royalty rates specified in the contract. In these cases, the signed agreement takes precedence over general practices. Claimants have 30 days from the notice to resolve any discrepancies. The portal allows them to adjust the percentages and upload documents such as rights reversal letters, contracts, or other evidence. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, the administrator must attempt to facilitate a resolution. If that fails, the case will be referred to a Special Master appointed by the court, who will make a final decision. The $1.5 billion settlement from Anthropic thus highlights the importance of contract timelines. For each disputed title, it is necessary to determine who held the reproduction rights at the relevant date and, if applicable, when the rights were returned to the author. Until claimants agree, the corresponding payment will remain pending.