An attorney for the authors confirmed Thursday that “authors and other copyright holders have filed claims for more than 92% of the more than 480,000 works included in the settlement.” But objectors say lawyers’ salaries should reflect the total number of claimants, not the total amount in the settlement fund.
By asking the court to make “reasonable and reasonable adjustments” to reduce attorney fees, Story is hoping to increase compensation to writers. Offering an example, he said that “a generous attorney payout of $70 million would increase individual plaintiff awards by approximately 25 percent, while attorneys would still receive the equivalent of their current top rates for hours worked”.
To Story, it also seemed as if the lawyers could have obtained greater compensation for the writers, but instead of pursuing “creative alternatives”, they “set very quickly to maximize” their own compensation.
The story said, “Had the lawyers been as skilled, patient and brilliant as they claim, and if the settlement had been the ‘home run’ lawyers claim, the plaintiffs would have received even more than this nominal amount.”
Reuben Lee, another member of the objecting class, agreed: “I believe the amount awarded is modest, and in no way reflects the full value of the unauthorized use of my work.”
The objectors may not win every battle, but they have at least convinced the court to consider their strongly worded arguments, including a warning that the agreement would not survive an appeal if the terms were not re-examined. Notably, their objections came shortly before the settlement was pulled out by a group of 25 class members, who filed a new lawsuit, showing that Anthropic has not finished fighting these claims.
Story said, “For the Court to agree that counsel’s request for nearly a third of a billion dollars, while individual plaintiffs settle for a tiny amount of compensation available and with no protections against future abuse, is a violation of civil justice and a slap in the face to all those who have worked hard to publish their works.” “Such a decision would also further the often-held stereotype that … class-action plaintiffs are simply a tool lawyers use to obtain Powerball-sized payouts.”
<a href