Vai al contenuto

Cookie di analisi

Usiamo Google Analytics e Google Tag Manager per contare le visite e capire quali pagine sono utili. Se accetti, Google Analytics può impostare cookie per riconoscere le tue visite successive. Se rifiuti, non imposta alcun cookie, ma Google riceve comunque un segnale senza cookie per ogni pagina che visiti. Non inviamo a Google il tuo nome, il tuo indirizzo e-mail né i dati della tua registrazione, e puoi cambiare la tua scelta in qualsiasi momento da «Impostazioni cookie» in fondo alla pagina. Privacy

Questa traduzione dell'interfaccia è una bozza e non è stata rivista da una persona madrelingua. L'inglese è la versione di riferimento. English

PayAuthors white paper: dated pirate-library catalogs as evidence for which books AI companies acquired

14 ott 2026 · Raccolto automaticamente da fonti pubbliche. Non revisionato da una persona.

Questo contenuto è disponibile solo nella lingua originale (inglese).

What it is

An October 2026 PayAuthors white paper (text revised Oct. 14, 2026) on how dated pirate-library catalogs and U.S. copyright registrations can support research into which books AI companies acquired for AI development.

The data

  • 22.4M catalog records across overlapping collections (not unique books)
  • 31 dated catalogs and lists: 25 LibGen snapshots (Nov. 2015–Jun. 2025), 4 Z-Library catalogs (incl. two Pirate Library Mirror indexes from 2022), 1 Books3 list (196,608 file names; ISBN list cross-checked against file names), 1 Internet Archive lending-library catalog
  • 8.03M U.S. literary-work registrations covered (1978–2025), 1.52M distinct registrations with at least one candidate catalog match

Key methodological points

A catalog can show that a library listed a particular edition by a particular date, and file identifiers or checksums can help compare a listing with files a company disclosed. It does not establish acquisition: that requires evidence such as a manifest, logs, testimony, or a stipulation. The paper grades evidence (court finding/order vs. company's own account vs. a party's allegation) separately from PayAuthors' own analysis, and notes that its exclusion screen for the Bartz settlement is an estimate, not the administrator's determination.

Case facts the paper draws on

  • Bartz v. Anthropic: court-described downloads of millions of books from LibGen and the Pirate Library Mirror; the final Works List covered 482,460 works under the $1.5B settlement
  • Meta has acknowledged acquiring LibGen and Anna's Archive data in its own filings
  • A discovery order in the OpenAI litigation described an employee's 2018 LibGen download as undisputed
  • Books3 (approx. 196,640 books, released 2020) was included in The Pile training dataset

This is a research guide, not a court document; it reports evidence and methods rather than asserting infringement.

Fonti