Anthropic lawsuit to proceed
A federal court in the Northern District of California ruled that Anthropic will face our consumer protection lawsuit. The Court crystallized the core allegation in Kahn v. Anthropic as follows: “Because payments are due monthly, reasonable consumers would plausibly understand the phrases ‘5x more usage than Pro’ and ‘20x more usage than Pro’ to mean that if they pay a premium for Max 5x or Max 20x, they will get 5x or 20x more usage than Pro per month. But they don’t.”
The Court also found that the “economic loss rule” does not bar the negligent misrepresentation claim because it alleges a “subspecies of fraud.” As to Anthropic’s defense that its website disclosed the usage was measured “per session,” the Court noted that phrase was not in the purchase funnel and was not incorporated into the contract.
The court recognized what Max subscribers already knew: “20x more usage” should mean 20x more usage, and a caveat buried outside the checkout page doesn't change that. We are pleased the core claims are moving forward.
We are proud to work alongside co-counsel Conn Law and the Clarkson Firm in seeking justice for consumers.
Read the Court’s ruling on the motion to dismiss here:
This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.
