"Calling out lawyers for requesting more than $320 million in legal fees when each author only expects a $3,000 payout, some objectors asked the court to delay approving the settlement until a more reasonable plaintiff compensation plan is constructed."
"“Every dollar that Counsel takes from the Settlement fund is one that is not given to those actually harmed,” wrote Pierce Story, an objector and author of two works covered by the settlement."
"Story estimated that the large payout could break down to lawyers receiving between roughly $10,000-$12,000 per hour, which he said included a generous estimate of hours for any future work. That's excessive, Story suggested, citing a T-Mobile case where the 8th Circuit court observed that “no reasonable class member would willingly pay” a much lower requested fee award between $7,000-$9,500."
"Ars reviewed several objections to the settlement, as well as letters from objectors who claimed that the authors' legal team was trying to unfairly shut them out from voicing concerns."
A federal judge declined to finalize a $1.5 billion copyright settlement tied to book piracy used to train AI. The judge sought clarification on why some authors and class members objected and opted out. Objectors argued that requested legal fees were disproportionately high compared with expected author payouts of about $3,000 each. One objector said every dollar taken by counsel reduced money available to those harmed. The objector estimated the fee request could translate into roughly $10,000 to $12,000 per hour and compared it to a prior case where a lower fee award was viewed as unreasonable for class members. Objectors also alleged the legal team tried to limit their ability to raise concerns.
Read at Ars Technica
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]