A coalition of Canada's largest news organisations has launched a copyright action against the artificial intelligence developer Anthropic in an Ontario court, alleging the company copied and used their journalism to train its Claude large-language model without permission.
Who filed and what they allege
The statement of claim, filed Oct. 6 and first reported by Cartt.ca, names several prominent news outlets including Postmedia, Torstar, The Globe and Mail and The Canadian Press. The companies say Anthropic collected text from their websites and incorporated that material into its AI systems without licences or authorisation.
"Anthropic has capitalized on the commercial success of its AI models, building an expansive suite of services, and raised significant capital — all without obtaining a valid licence from any of the News Media Companies," the court filing says.
The claim also accuses Anthropic of breaching website terms of service and of circumventing technological protection measures designed to restrict copying of content. Plaintiffs say the company’s actions have left them "substantially and unjustly enriched to the detriment of the News Media Companies."
Context and earlier litigation
The current action follows a previous, related case: in 2024, several of the same news organisations, together with CBC/Radio‑Canada, launched a lawsuit against OpenAI. That matter remains unresolved. The complaint filed against Anthropic notes that other creators and industries have raised similar concerns about how large AI models obtain and use copyrighted material.
What the companies are asking for
The statement of claim sets out allegations of copyright infringement and unjust enrichment. It seeks remedies through the courts but the filing does not specify a monetary figure in the materials released publicly. Anthropic has not responded to a request for comment. As with any civil suit, the allegations must be proven in court.
Why it matters locally
For Ontario readers and newsrooms, the case underscores two pressing issues: how AI companies source training data and how that sourcing might affect local journalism’s revenue and sustainability. News organisations argue their reporting represents a large share of online journalistic content and that unauthorised use risks undercutting established business models.
Legal outcomes could shape whether news publishers receive compensation or licensing fees from AI companies, or whether platforms and model developers will be required to change how they gather material from the web. That in turn could affect the availability and cost of AI services in Canada, and the economic health of local press outlets that serve communities across the province.
Practical points for readers
- Filing date: Oct. 6 (first reported by Cartt.ca).
- Named plaintiffs include national and Ontario-based outlets.
- Allegations include copyright infringement, breach of terms of service and circumvention of technical protections.
Litigation timelines for copyright claims against technology firms can extend for months or years. Courts will consider how Canadian copyright law applies to the practice of "scraping" online content to develop AI models, and whether contractual terms or technological measures limit such use.
Parties involved — at a glance
| Plaintiff | Role |
|---|---|
| Postmedia | National newspaper chain |
| Torstar | Newspaper publisher |
| The Globe and Mail | National broadsheet |
| The Canadian Press | Wire service |
What to watch next
Key developments will include any public response from Anthropic, the court’s handling of disclosure and evidence over how the company assembled training data, and whether the plaintiffs seek interim relief such as orders preventing further copying. The case will likely be watched closely by other Canadian creators, technology companies and lawmakers shaping AI policy.
For residents who rely on local journalism, the dispute highlights an ongoing tension between innovation in artificial intelligence and the commercial models that support reporting. The courts will play a central role in resolving how those interests balance under Canadian law.
