Anthropic's $1.5 billion settlement for allegedly pirating books to train its AI was supposed to be the largest copyright settlement in history. Instead, it's turning into a masterclass in how not to make your class members feel valued.

On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin declined to rubber-stamp the deal, instead asking authors to address objections that lawyers are getting a bit too enthusiastic with the fee calculator. Objectors claim the legal team is requesting over $320 million in fees while authors are looking at a $3,000 payout each - a ratio that has some calling the compensation a "pittance."

Pierce Story, an objector and author of two works covered by the settlement, did the math: lawyers stand to earn roughly $10,000 - $12,000 per hour, which he argued is excessive. For comparison, a T-Mobile case saw the 8th Circuit balk at fees of $7,000 - $9,500 per hour. Story also accused attorneys of breaking a promise to tie their compensation to member payouts, and noted that many authors haven't even registered for their share.

"Every dollar that Counsel takes from the Settlement fund is one that is not given to those actually harmed," Story wrote, adding that "no reasonable class member would willingly pay" such fees.

An attorney for authors confirmed Thursday that "authors and other copyright holders filed claims covering over 92% of the more than 480,000 works included in the settlement." But objectors argue fees should be based on claimants, not the total fund.

Story proposed a compromise: a "still-generous Counsel payout of $70 million" would give authors a 25% boost while still paying lawyers their top rates. He suggested attorneys settled "far too quickly to maximize" their own compensation rather than pursuing "creative options" for authors.

Ruben Lee, another objector, agreed: "I believe the amount offered is paltry, and does not in any way reflect the full value of the unauthorized use of my work."

The objections came just before 25 class members who opted out filed a new lawsuit, signaling Anthropic isn't done fighting. Story warned the court that approving the current terms would be "an aberration of civil justice and a slap in the face to all those who labored to publish their works."

Even retired Judge William Alsup, who initially approved the settlement, questioned the fees and recommended an independent investigation. According to Lea Bishop, a copyright law professor and non-class member objector, that recommendation "was not squarely disclosed to incoming Judge Martinez-Olguin."

Objectors also want Anthropic to destroy all copies of pirated works - digital and physical - before the settlement proceeds. James R. Sills, who has two works in the settlement, noted a key problem: "I don't know how Anthropic acquired/pirated my two works. No authors will know how their works were taken by Anthropic."

Communication has been, shall we say, less than ideal. Ruben Lee couldn't file his objection via the court's ECF and PACER systems. Robert C. Jacobson had his objection marked as improperly filed despite the court acknowledging "a delay in docketing certain objections." Victoria Pinder's objection was initially deemed "invalid" - then the lawyers misspelled her name as "Lea Victoria Pinder" by conflating her with another objector.

Authors must respond to objections by May 21, when Anthropic must also explain "why late opt outs should not be honored." The judge has ordered briefs, and the drama continues.