Licensing beats litigation

A federal judge just rejected the $1.5B Anthropic-authors settlement. Called it "nowhere close to complete." If you're building enterprise AI, here's what matters: courts move slow, business moves fast. You need data certainty now, not after years of litigation.

Judge Alsup wants specifics - which works are covered, how claims get handled, what notice goes to rights holders. Even with nine figures on the table, nobody knows who owns what or who gets paid. That's not a foundation for your product roadmap.

Here's the practical math. Litigation burns cash with no clear end date. Licensing delivers immediate value on a schedule you control. Rights holders get recurring revenue. You get datasets with clean provenance and clear usage rights. Less time with lawyers, more time building.

"Compliant" means doing the work. Clear ownership records. Usage grants that cover training, evaluation, and retention. Audit trails showing who used what and who got paid. Data delivery that drops into your existing pipeline. When these pieces work, licensing scales. When they don't, you're trading speed for headlines.

At AIDC, we focus on what works. Unlock your private enterprise data under strong governance. Monetize clearly owned copyrighted content when the ownership is clean and the economics make sense. Everything auditable, everything operational in environments you already trust.

Build on data you already own or that is clearly licensed with an AI training contract. Let the courts sort out the public corpus while you ship product.

dpd