内容来源：https://techcrunch.com/2026/09/06/authors-push-back-as-publishers-and-agents-seek-share-of-anthropic-settlement/

内容总结：

近日，多位作家在社交媒体上反映，他们在收取Anthropic公司15亿美元版权和解金时遭遇意外，有人发现自己的赔偿款被第三方主张权利。此事迅速引发文坛关注。

此前，美国法院裁定，AI模型在合理使用原则下使用受版权保护素材进行训练不构成侵权，但盗版行为则为法律禁止。基于此，Anthropic就相关集体诉讼达成和解协议，该协议于今年7月获最终批准，赔偿现已进入支付阶段。

根据协议条款，近50万部作品的作者可按每部盗版作品获得3000美元的标准受偿。若作品仍由传统出版社在版发行，作者与出版社将平分赔款；若为自费出版或出版权已回归作者，则作者应获得全额赔偿。

然而，众多作家近日在网上发帖爆料，部分出版社似乎试图攫取超出其应得份额的赔偿。惊悚小说作家艾普丽尔·亨利质问道：“哈珀柯林斯在玩什么把戏？17年前就已权利回归的作品，他们竟仍在Anthropic和解案中主张权利。更巧的是，同一天我收到信用提醒，被告知该出版社被添加为我雇主——他们从未是我的雇主！”

知名博客“作家警示”主笔维多利亚·施特劳斯透露，她收到的作家投诉大致分为两类：一类是出版社对已无权主张的作品（因版权已回归）申请赔偿；另一类是出版社本应只获50%赔偿，却申请了100%的全额。

施特劳斯坦言，“若非记录严重混乱，事情不至于此，我本不愿将此类行为归咎于恶意”，并表示部分出版社已承认系操作失误，正请求Anthropic修正。美国作家协会CEO玛丽·拉森伯格向《纽约时报》表示，她不认为这是“出版社的掠夺行为”，也不信出版社“刻意损害作者利益”，称之为账目混乱与和解程序复杂导致的必然结果。

尽管施特劳斯亦承认收到的投诉仅是“冰山一角”，但她同时强调：“过去两天收到的大量报告，以及作者反复反馈相同错误的事实，表明这些并非大型项目可能出现的常规小故障，而是更具普遍性与系统性的问题。”

值得一提的是，施特劳斯还收到关于多家文学经纪公司争相索赔的投诉。她对此颇感意外，因为“经纪人并非所售书籍的权利人”。作家考特妮·米兰在Bluesky上更为直白地写道：“显然有些经纪公司正试图在Anthropic和解案中分一杯羹。我认为他们绝不该这么做——什么东西，快住手！”

米兰及作家协会还向作者们提供了异议申诉指南。鉴于作品的版权回归时间节点至关重要，作家若想主张100%全额赔偿，须确保权利回归发生于2022年8月10日——即和解协议中的“下载日期”之前。

中文翻译：

一些希望从Anthropic公司15亿美元版权和解金中获得自己份额的作者表示，他们本周收到了令人意外的邮件——邮件通知他们，有人正在对他们的赔偿款提出申领。

Anthropic去年在一起版权集体诉讼中达成和解，此前法官裁定，根据合理使用原则，在受版权保护的材料上训练AI模型是合法的，但盗版这些材料则不然。该和解协议于7月获得最终批准，允许赔偿款继续推进。

根据和解条款，近50万本图书的作者将因每部被盗版的作品获得3000美元赔偿。如果该书仍由传统出版商在版发行，这笔钱将由作者和出版商五五平分。如果该书是自费出版的，或者出版商通过允许该书绝版而将版权归还给作者，则作者应获得全部赔偿。

但作家们一直在社交媒体上发帖称，出版商似乎在某些赔偿款中申领了超出其应得份额的部分。例如，悬疑惊悚小说作家艾普丽尔·亨利问道：“哈珀柯林斯到底在搞什么？他们对Anthropic和解金中一本至少17年前就已归还版权给我的书提出了申领，而且就在同一天，我收到了一条信用提醒，说他们被添加为我的雇主！（但他们从来都不是。）”

在人气博客“作家当心”上，维多利亚·施特劳斯写道，她收到的作者投诉大致分为两类：一类是出版商对已不再拥有合法权利（因为版权已归还）的作品要求赔偿；另一类是出版商在只应获得50%的情况下却要求100%的全额赔偿。

施特劳斯表示，在这两种情况下，她都“不愿意将那些可以用记录管理不善来合理解释的事情归咎于恶意”——她指出，一些出版商已经表示这是一个错误，并已要求Anthropic予以纠正。

同样，作家协会首席执行官玛丽·拉森伯格告诉《纽约时报》，她不认为这是“出版商在抢占”，也不认为出版商“刻意想坑任何一位作者”。相反，她认为这是记录管理不善和混乱的和解流程导致的可预见结果。

施特劳斯也承认，她看到的任何投诉都只是“透过一堵巨大墙壁上的小裂缝的一瞥”。

但她写道：“然而，过去两天我收到的大量投诉报告，以及作者们反复报告完全相同的错误这一事实，让我觉得这些并不是你在如此大规模运作中可能预期的那种常规小故障，而是某种更为广泛和系统性的问题。”

出版商并不是唯一寻求分一杯羹的群体。施特劳斯表示，她收到了投诉称许多文学代理机构也在提出申领，她说这令人惊讶，因为“代理并不是他们所销售图书的权利人”。

作家考特妮·米兰（前法官助理兼法学教授海迪·邦德的笔名）在Bluesky上发帖时更为直言不讳，她写道：“显然有些代理试图在Anthropic和解金中申领一定比例，我完全不认为他们应该这么做，搞什么鬼，快停止那种行为！”

米兰和作家协会还分享了更多关于作者如何对赔偿分配提出异议的细节。（一个棘手的问题：某本书的版权何时归还作者。为了对一本书提出100%的申领，版权归还需要在2022年8月10日之前发生，该日期是和解协议中的“下载日期”。）

英文来源：

Some authors hoping to receive their share of Anthropic’s $1.5 billion copyright settlement said they received surprising emails this week — emails informing them that someone else was making a claim on their payments.
Anthropic settled a copyright class action suit last year, after a judge ruled that training AI models on copyrighted material is legal under fair use doctrine, but pirating that material was not. The deal received final approval in July, allowing the payments to move forward.
Under the terms of the settlement, the authors of nearly 500,000 titles will be paid $3,000 for each pirated work. If the book is still in-print with a traditional publisher, the money will be split 50-50 between author and publisher. If the book was self-published, or if the publisher reverted the rights by allowing the book to go out-of-print, then the author should get the entire payment.
But writers have been posting on social media that publishers seem to be claiming more than their fair share of some payments. For example, mystery and thriller author April Henry asked, “WTF is HarperCollins playing at? They claimed one of my books on the Anthropic Settlement that reverted back at least 17 years ago AND on the same day I got a credit alert saying they had been added as my employer! (which they never were).”
At the popular blog Writers Beware, Victoria Strauss wrote that she’s been receiving author complaints that fall into two broad categories: one where publishers are seeking payment for works that they no longer have a legitimate claim on (because the rights have reverted), and another where publishers are seeking a full 100% payment when they’re only entitled to 50%.
In both cases, Strauss said she’s “reluctant to attribute to malice what can be plausibly explained by poor recordkeeping” — and she noted that some publishers have already said this is a mistake that they’ve asked Anthropic to fix.
Similarly, Authors Guild CEO Mary Rasenberger told The New York Times that she doesn’t see this as “a grab by the publishers” and that she doesn’t believe publishers are “specifically trying to screw any author over.” Instead, she argued that this is the predictable result of bad record-keeping and a confusing settlement process.
Strauss also acknowledged that any complaints she’s seen are just “a peek through a small crack in a massive wall.”
“But the unusually large number of reports I’ve received over the last two days, as well as the fact that authors are reporting the exact same errors over and over, suggest to me that these aren’t the kind of routine glitches you might expect from such a large operation, but something much more wide[s]pread and systemic,” she wrote.
And publishers aren’t the only ones seeking a cut of the payments. Strauss said she’s gotten complaints that a number of literary agencies are also making claims, which she said is surprising since “agents are not rightsholders in the books that they sell.”
Author Courtney Milan (the pen name of former law clerk and law professor Heidi Bond) was more blunt in a post on Bluesky, writing, “Apparently some agents are trying to claim percentages on the Anthropic settlement, and I do not REMOTELY think they should do this, what the fuck, stop that shit!”
Milan and the Authors Guild also shared more details about how authors can dispute their payment allocations. (One tricky issue: When the rights to a specific book reverted. In order for an author to make a 100% claim on a book, the rights reversion needs to have happened before August 10, 2022, which is the “download date” in the settlement.)