The ripple effect from Judge Alsup’s ruling on summary judgment in Bartz v. Anthropic continues. Yet another plaintiff is copying what I call the Shadow Library Strategy and attempting to add a separate claim of copyright infringement based on the allegation that the defendant AI company downloaded and used additional shadow libraries containing pirated books. (This strategy is also called trying to turn the case into Bartz II.)
Although the motion is heavily redacted, it looks like it seeks to add additional shadow libraries or pirated books datasets beyond the one(s) already in the existing complaint, which states:
The Shadow Library / Pirated Books Strategy: The Shadow Library Strategy is to raise a separate theory of infringement–apart from the training of AI models–based on the AI company’s initial acquisition of copies of works from controversial shadow libraries.
In Concord Music v. Anthropic, Judge Lee recently rejected Concord Music’s attempt to add the Shadow Library Strategy to its complaint. But that was due to Concord Music’s failure to diligently investigate this theory before fact discovery was about to close.
The Nazemian plaintiffs are also seeking an extension to the current scheduling order. We will have to see what Judge Tigar says.
The motion also seeks to add vicarious and contributory infringement claims against NVIDIA based on what it alleges are newly discovered evidence that “NVIDIA provides tools directing its customers’ computers to download the pirated Books3 repository.”
Oddly, Nazemian himself wants to drop out of the lawsuit: “(4) voluntarily withdraw Plaintiff Abdi Nazemian from the case and dismiss his claims without prejudice.” That presumably would leave the other plaintiff Dubus.
Susman Godfrey lawyers are among the plaintiffs’ attorneys. It’s unclear from the docket when Susman Godfrey joined the original plaintiffs’ attorneys in this case.
Excerpts from Nazemian’s motion
DOWNLOAD NAZEMIAN’S BRIEF
Related Stories