Anthropic and Round Hill Music, which just sued Anthropic and Suno in separate lawsuits, are already skirmishing on which set of cases, if any, the courts should consider related: (1) Round Hill Music v. Anthropic related to the music cases before Judge Lee, Concord Music I and II and BMG v. Anthropic; or (2) Round Hill Music v. Anthropic before Judge Breyer to Round Hill Music v. Suno before Judge Lin.
Because Concord Music I is the earliest filed case, Judge Eumi Lee presumably gets to decide first whether she considers Round Hill Music v. Anthropic related. If she does, Round Hill Music would get reassigned to her from Judge Breyer.
If Judge Lee doesn’t consider Round Hill Music v. Anthropic related to Concord Music, then Judge Rita Lin would presumably decide whether Round Hill Music v. Anthropic is related the earlier filed Round Hill Music v. Suno before her.
Got that?
Of the two scenarios, it’s far more common–though not guaranteed–to treat multiple cases against the same defendant as related if they involve a common nucleus of facts.
By contrast, it has not been common, at least in the AI litigation, to relate cases involving different defendants that did not act in concert. For example, although technically it did not involve a formal request to relate cases, Judge Chhabria sue sponte dismissed a lawsuit filed by book authors against multiple AI companies, but he kept the part of the suit against Meta, which he related to Kadrey over which he presides. Presumably, had the book authors requested Judge Chhabria to relate the various cases against different AI companies, he would have rejected it.
Anthropic Opposes Round Hill Music’s request to relate Round Hill Music v. Anthropic with Round Hill Music v. Suno
Round Hill Music Opposes Anthropic’s request to relate Round Hill Music v. Anthropic with the cluster of cases involving Concord Music I and II, and BMG v. Anthropic
