Elvis Presley’s rightsholders sue Anthropic over 274 songs, seeking $41M

Elvis Presley’s rightsholders have sued Anthropic, alleging it used 274 songs to train its AI models without permission and seeking more than $41 million, according to the New York Times, which also reported that Anthropic disagrees with the claims and will defend itself.

We could not find a statement or court filing from either side, so everything below is an allegation or a report by the outlets named, not an established fact.

What the complaint reportedly alleges

The New York Times describes the suit as a claim that Presley’s music was used to train Anthropic’s models without consent. Digital Music News adds more detail: it reports the suit was filed on October 23, 2026, by a subsidiary of Authentic Brands Group, which controls Presley’s intellectual property, together with other companies with a stake in his music.

According to that report, the complaint names songs including “All Shook Up,” “Can’t Help Falling in Love” and “A Little Less Conversation.” It also claims that when Claude was asked to recreate songs “for a modern audience,” it produced material closely resembling the originals, despite the safeguards Anthropic says it has against reproducing existing lyrics or compositions. These are the plaintiffs’ claims; the outlet did not say they had been tested in court.

The amount sought, more than $41 million across the 274 songs, is the figure the New York Times reported. Neither source we could read explains in detail how the plaintiffs reached it.

Anthropic’s position so far

Per the New York Times headline, Anthropic says it disagrees and will defend itself. Digital Music News notes the company has previously argued that training on copyrighted material can be protected under US fair use law. Whether that argument applies here is for the court to decide, and the sources we read give no hearing dates or rulings.

A new plaintiff in a crowded field

The case adds a famous catalog to music copyright claims Anthropic already faces. Digital Music News lists Universal Music Publishing Group, Concord Music Group, Sony Music Publishing and Warner Chappell Music among earlier complainants, though it gives no details of those cases in the text we could read. The same article says the Presley plaintiffs’ lead attorney previously represented Marvin Gaye’s estate in the “Blurred Lines” case.

For readers, the practical point is limited for now. Nothing in the reports says Claude’s behavior or availability has changed, and the case is at its start. What to watch is whether Anthropic’s fair use defense and its stated output safeguards are tested against specific song examples, which is the kind of evidence this complaint reportedly relies on.

The complaint itself was not available to us, nor was the New York Times article, so the court and the full list of plaintiffs are unconfirmed. We will update if Anthropic or the plaintiffs publish a statement.