Things went horribly for Devin “Velvel” Freedman, counsel for ClaimsHero at today’s hearing.
As we predicted before the hearing, things woulldn’t–and didn’t–end well for ClaimsHero.
From the start of ClaimsHero’s argument, Judge Alsup excoriated Freedman, a lawyer from Freedman Normand Friedland LLP, for ClaimsHero’s “misleading” interference with the claims and opt out process approved by the court. In court and their briefs, Bartz book authors’ Class Counsel recited a litany of ways in which ClaimsHero’s social media marketing, emails to class members, and whole website and intake process for “claims” was, in their view, a “fraud” and “misleading.” (See Related Stories below for more.)
According to BloombergLaw, at the hearing Judge Alsup said ClaimsHero has “Z-E-R-O” experience litigating cases in federal and state court, and the company is using “misleading” overtures to “trick” class members to opt out. Freedman reportedly responded to the Judge’s concern about lack of experience by saying that ClaimsHero is a new law firm, according to Law360.
“ClaimsHero isn’t a hero of anything.”
judge william alsup to claimshero lawyer
Here are a few choice quotes of Judge Alsup from Bloomberg Law’s reporting by Annelise Levy:
- Judge Alsup was “‘disturbed‘ by the ‘blatant attempt by your client to trick people into opting out” to make a ‘quick buck‘ by accumulating opt outs to try and cut a sweeter deal with Anthropic.”
- “[Judge] Alsup said that would amount to ‘extortion’ and that he’d refer the company to the US attorney if it happens.”
- “[Judge] Alsup called ClaimsHero’s lawsuit experience ‘Z-E-R-O’ and dubbed their marketing as ‘propaganda.’”
- “ClaimsHero isn’t a hero of anything.”
Judge Alsup granted interim relief
Judge Alsup granted interim relief to the Bartz class of authors. ClaimsHero has 48 hours to update its website in the following ways:
- Disclose that ClaimsHero itself “has no experience in federal or state court.” Plus, disclose that ClaimsHero would enlist another law firm with a higher contingency fee to litigate the case. According to Law360, Judge Alsup said: “I feel this is the single biggest misleading part.”[Without such disclosure,] it is a “bait and switch” and “fraud.” [Editor’s note: if ClaimsHero enlisted another firm to do the actual litigation against Anthropic, presumably ClaimsHero would still receive some percentage of any recovery, as stated in the FAQ on its website for the Anthropic case, in addition to the percentage that would go to the second law firm.]
- Disclose that Judge Alsup ruled for Anthropic on fair use in AI training.
- Stop using the word “claims” in the way Bartz Class Counsel identified as misleading.
- Stop using Anthropic’s stylized trademarks and logos in its overtures to class members.
- Produce all ClaimsHero’s marketing materials re this case to both court and parties.
Matt Freund, ClaimsHero CEO, must testify at evidentiary hearing on Nov. 25
Judge Alsup scheduled an evidentiary hearing for November 25, 8 AM for the court to question authors who have already opted out and enlisted ClaimsHero’s service.
ClaimsHero CEO Matthew Freund must appear in person at the evidentiary hearing. And, as Judge Alsup told the ClaimsHero lawyer to convey: Freund will be testifying under oath. Oh boy. Buckle up.
The 6 authors who opted out using ClaimsHero’s service before ClaimsHero changed its website due to Bartz Class Counsel’s request also must appear at the hearing, but via Zoom conference. They also must testify under oath.
These 6 authors are:
- Lisa Barretta
- Michael Kochin
- Jane Adams
- John Carreyrou
- Philip Shishkin
- Matthew Sacks
According to Law360, Judge Alsup said: “I’m going to get to the bottom of what they thought they were getting into.”
It’s unclear from the record whether ClaimsHero secured additional class authors to opt out beyond these 6.
The summary from the minute entry: “Court made interim findings and ordered interim relief as stated on the record. Court ordered evidentiary productions as stated on the record. Court further ordered specific appearances at an Evidentiary Hearing set for 11/25/2025 08:00 AM in San Francisco, Courtroom 12, 19th Floor before Judge William Alsup.”
What does a potential referral to the U.S. Attorney mean?
And, if you’re wondering, a referral to the U.S. Attorney would mean a federal prosecutor would review the case for potential criminal investigation.
Judge Alsup made such a referral in the past when he presided over a civil trade secret theft lawsuit, Waymo v. Uber. That eventually led to an indictment and plea bargain.
Related Stories