Anthropic Stands Up for Attorney-Client Privilege!

In the latest twist in Bartz v. Anthropic, plaintiffs are making a desperate—and legally flimsy—move to force disclosure of Anthropic's privileged legal advice. Their argument? That simply asserting an "innocent infringement" defense should waive attorney-client privilege entirely. Anthropic isn't having it.

In this video, I break down Anthropic's detailed legal response, which calls out the plaintiffs for trying to rewrite rock-solid Ninth Circuit precedent and gut attorney-client protections across the board. From fair use to volitional conduct, this fight has major implications not just for AI developers, but for legal privilege itself.

Even outside of copyright and AI, this would have a MASSIVE chilling effect on people discussing their cases with their own attorneys, if simple non-volition can pierce privilege!

Response to Order to Show Cause – #280 in Bartz v. Anthropic PBC https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69058235/280/bartz-v-anthropic-pbc/

⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯
💬Bᴏɢᴏsɪᴛʏ Dɪꜱᴄᴏʀᴅ: https://discord.bogosity.tv/
💬Lᴏʀᴅ Kɪʟʟɪᴀɴ’ꜱ Dɪꜱᴄᴏʀᴅ: http://bit.ly/LK-Discord
▶️YᴏᴜTᴜʙᴇ: https://www.youtube.com/shanedk
▶️Oᴅʏsᴇᴇ: https://odysee.com/%24/invite/@shanedk:4
▶️Rᴜᴍʙʟᴇ https://rumble.com/c/shanedk
💬Dɪꜱᴄᴏʀᴅ: http://bit.ly/LK-Discord
💰Dᴏɴᴀᴛᴇ ᴏʀ ꜱᴜʙꜱᴄʀɪʙᴇ: https://donate.bogosity.tv

0:00 - Intro
0:34 - Advice of Counsel Defense
1:59 - Anthropic Never Invoked Advice of Counsel Defense
6:22 - Plaintiffs Assertion Would Gut Attorney-Client Privilege
8:08 - This Would Result in a Chilling Effect on All Legal Representation