The recent lawsuits filed by major record labels against AI companies Suno and Udio underscore significant legal and ethical challenges posed by artificial intelligence

in the music industry. On June 24, 2024, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), along with prominent labels such as Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group, and Warner Records, announced legal action against the AI start-ups for allegedly using copyrighted sound recordings without authorization to train their AI models[ 1 ] [ 2 ] . This case marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing debate over intellectual property rights and the burgeoning influence of AI technologies in creative fields.

Suno and Udio have been accused of producing AI-generated music that closely mimics the style and sound of established artists, raising questions about the extent to which copyrighted material can be used in training AI models without infringing on the rights of original creators[ 3 ] . The RIAA and the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) have emphasized the need for robust legal protections to ensure that musicians and artists receive proper credit and compensation for their work, arguing that unauthorized use of their recordings constitutes a severe threat to the music ecosystem[ 4 ] .

The lawsuits, filed in federal courts in Massachusetts and New York, seek declara- tions of infringement, injunctions to prevent further unauthorized use, and significant monetary damages[ 5 ] . Industry leaders have voiced strong support for these legal actions, highlighting the potential long-term implications for the music industry and

the importance of establishing ethical guidelines for the use of AI in music creation[ 6 ] . Critics argue that the unregulated proliferation of AI-generated music could under- mine the value of human creativity and disrupt existing market dynamics[ 7 ] .

As the legal proceedings unfold, the outcomes are expected to set important prece- dents for the intersection of AI technology and copyright law. The cases against Suno and Udio are likely to influence future regulatory frameworks and policies, shaping how AI technologies can be developed and utilized responsibly in creative industries[ 8 ] . This ongoing controversy reflects broader concerns about the balance between innovation and the protection of intellectual property in the digital age.

Background

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) in the music industry has brought both innovation and controversy. AI music generators like Suno and Udio have utilized advanced algorithms to produce music that closely mimics the style and sound of established artists. This new technology has sparked significant legal and ethical concerns regarding copyright infringement and the unauthorized use of copyrighted materials. In recent years, the music industry has seen an influx of AI-generated music on social media platforms and streaming services[ 1 ] . This trend has raised numerous legal questions about the use of copyrighted works without permission, leading to lawsuits that will likely shape the future of AI’s intersection with the music industry[ 1 ] . The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and major record labels have initiated legal action against Suno and Udio, alleging that these companies used copyrighted sound recordings without authorization to train their AI models[ 2 ] .

The National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) has expressed strong support for this lawsuit, emphasizing the need for protections for musicians and artists whose work forms the foundation of digital replication[ 3 ] . David Israelite, NMPA President and CEO, stated, “Musicians and artists whose work and talents form the foundation of digital replication must be provided with protections, including consent for the use of their sound, credit, and fair compensation for their music”[ 3 ] . The RIAA claims that Suno and Udio are attempting to conceal the extent of their copyright infringement[ 2 ] . According to the complaint against Suno, the company did not deny using copyrighted materials in its training data but instead claimed that the data is “confidential business information”[ 2 ] .

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a key piece of legislation relevant to this case. Enacted in 1998, the DMCA criminalizes the production and dissemination of technology intended to circumvent measures that control access to copyrighted works[ 4 ] . This law plays a critical role in protecting the rights of content creators in the digital age. Furthermore, the DMCA’s notice-and-takedown system allows copyright owners to inform online service providers about infringing material, which can then be taken down[ 5 ] .

As AI-generated music continues to evolve, it raises complex legal and ethical issues. While AI tools offer new possibilities for creativity, they also pose significant risks of copyright infringement. The ongoing lawsuit against Suno and Udio highlights the challenges faced by the music industry in navigating the intersection of technology and intellectual property rights[ 6 ] [ 7 ] .

The Lawsuit

The lawsuits were announced on June 24, 2024, by the Recording Industry Associa- tion of America (RIAA) and involve multiple major record labels, including Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group, and Warner Records[ 3 ] [ 8 ] . These labels have taken legal action against two prominent AI start-ups, Suno and Udio, for alleged copyright infringement on a massive scale[ 9 ] [ 10 ] . The plaintiffs assert that Suno and Udio used copyrighted sound recordings without authorization to train their AI systems, resulting in the production of music that closely mimics original works by famous artists[ 3 ] [ 9 ] .

The lawsuits have been filed in two different federal courts: one against Suno AI in the District of Massachusetts and the other against Uncharted Labs, Inc., the developer of Udio AI, in the Southern District of New York[ 8 ] [ 11 ] . The complaints seek several forms of relief: declarations of infringement, injunctions to prevent further unautho- rized use of the plaintiffs’ music, and monetary damages for the infringements already committed[ 11 ] . Specifically, the plaintiffs are requesting compensation of $150,000 per work infringed[ 8 ] .

The lawsuits cite numerous examples of unauthorized copying, including songs that closely resemble iconic tracks like ABBA’s “Dancing Queen” and Mariah Carey’s “All I Want for Christmas Is You”[ 9 ] . The plaintiffs argue that the unauthorized replication of these works threatens the entire music ecosystem by undermining the value of creative labor and intellectual property[ 12 ] [ 13 ] .

Industry leaders have voiced strong support for these legal actions. Richard James Burgess, President and CEO of the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM), emphasized that independent artists and labels often suffer the most from such infringements and need robust legal protections to safeguard their work[ 3 ] . The RIAA and other stakeholders hope that these lawsuits will set important precedents for the ethical and lawful development of generative AI technologies in the music industry[ 3 ] [ 11 ] [ 13 ] .

Both Suno and Udio have amassed significant user bases and financial backing, with Suno alone claiming over 10 million users and raising $125 million from investors- [ 9 ] [ 8 ] . Despite their commercial success, the AI firms are accused of attempting to obscure the extent of their copyright violations rather than aligning their operations with legal standards[ 3 ] [ 11 ] . The outcome of these cases could have far-reaching implications for the future of AI in the creative industries[ 13 ] .

Legal Proceedings

The lawsuits against Suno AI and Udio AI, initiated by major record labels includ- ing Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group Recordings, and Warner Records, were announced on Monday by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)[ 9 ] [ 8 ] . The legal actions were filed in the federal courts of Boston and New York, targeting Suno AI and Uncharted Labs (the developer of Udio AI), respectively[ 8 ] .

The primary allegations revolve around the unauthorized use of copyrighted sound recordings by the AI tools developed by Suno and Udio[ 3 ] . The lawsuits claim that these AI systems were trained on plaintiffs’ copyrighted material without permission, and subsequently produced outputs that closely resemble these works. This consti- tutes a violation of copyright laws and results in significant harm to the plaintiffs[ 3 ] [ 8 ] . The plaintiffs are seeking declarations of infringement, injunctions to prevent further unauthorized use, and substantial damages for the infringements that have already occurred[ 3 ] [ 8 ] [ 2 ] .

The lawsuits demand statutory damages of up to $150,000 per infringed work, citing the severity and willfulness of the infringements[ 14 ] [ 2 ] . Additionally, the plaintiffs emphasize the importance of these legal actions in setting a precedent for the ethical and lawful development of generative AI systems, and ensuring that AI companies like Suno and Udio cannot exploit artists’ work for profit without proper licensing and consent[ 3 ] [ 8 ] [ 2 ] .

Suno AI, which released its first product last year and has formed a partnership with Microsoft, charges a monthly fee for its services and claims over 10 million users[ 9 ] [ 8 ] . Despite this success, the company, along with Udio AI, is accused of hiding the extent of its infringement rather than adhering to legal and ethical

standards in AI development[ 3 ] [ 8 ] [ 2 ] . Both companies have yet to publicly respond to the allegations[ 2 ] .

Industry Reactions

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) views the unregulated cre- ation of AI-generated content as an existential threat to the music industry. They argue that AI-generated tracks could compete directly against human-made music and disrupt the market for music samples. An RIAA spokesperson commented, “Winners of the streaming era worked cooperatively with artists and rightsholders to properly license music. The losers did exactly what Suno and Udio are doing now”[ 15 ] .

This sentiment reflects broader industry concerns that AI firms are profiting from copyrighted recordings without appropriate licensing, which some claim constitutes “wholesale theft” of creative works[ 12 ] .

David Israelite, President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Music Publish- ers’ Association (NMPA), has voiced strong support for the lawsuits against Suno and Udio. Israelite remarked, “NMPA is completely supportive of this lawsuit against Suno and Udio. Both platforms clearly train on copyrighted recordings – it is apparent to anyone listening to what they generate”[ 3 ] . His stance highlights the belief that these AI platforms are infringing on copyrights and underscores the need for legal action to protect artists’ rights.

Similarly, Richard James Burgess, President and Chief Executive Officer of the American Association of Independent Music (A2IM), has emphasized the detrimental impact on independent artists and labels. He stated, “Independent artists, record labels, and songwriters make immense contributions to culture, yet they often suffer the most when services build businesses by using their work without permission or compensation”[ 3 ] . Burgess’s remarks illustrate the widespread discontent within the independent music community regarding the practices of AI music generators.

The legal actions against Suno and Udio have garnered support from various sectors of the music industry, with calls for government intervention and updated policies to protect artists from the unauthorized use of their work. Advocates argue that such measures are essential to preserving the integrity and sustainability of the music ecosystem[ 12 ] . As the debate continues, these industry reactions signal a critical juncture in the intersection of AI and copyright law, with potential implications for future technological and creative landscapes.

Implications for the Music Industry

The lawsuits filed by major record labels against AI companies Suno and Udio highlight significant implications for the music industry. One of the primary concerns

is the potential for AI-generated music to disrupt the market for human-made tracks and music samples. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has expressed that the unregulated creation of AI-generated content poses an existential threat, as it may compete directly with human-composed music and destabilize existing market dynamics[ 15 ] . The rapid rise of AI-generated music has brought about questions regarding copyright infringement and the necessity for music rights agreements to protect original compositions from unauthorized use[ 7 ] .

The lawsuits argue that Suno and Udio have engaged in massive copyright infringe- ment by using copyrighted songs to train their AI models without proper licensing. This action is seen as threatening to cause enduring and irreparable harm to recording artists, record labels, and the broader music industry, potentially diminishing the qual- ity of new music and undermining shared cultural values[ 13 ] [ 9 ] . The AI companies have been accused of creating large-scale imitations that flood playlists, thereby infringing on creators’ rights and devaluing artistic work[ 3 ] .

One significant aspect of this legal battle is the distinction between the composition rights and the copyright of sound recordings. While the labels may own the latter, the composition rights may belong to different entities, complicating the legal landscape and making it difficult to resolve disputes based solely on musical notation similari- ties[ 16 ] . Additionally, the lawsuits seek injunctions to prevent further infringement and demand damages for the alleged unauthorized use of copyrighted sound recordings- [ 3 ] .

Moreover, the potential consequences extend beyond just legal and economic impacts. The ethical considerations surrounding the use of AI in music creation are profound. There is a lack of comprehensive research on the ramifications of

AI-generated music within the music industry, particularly concerning the economic and legal challenges it presents[ 17 ] . This situation underscores the importance of establishing clear regulations and frameworks to ensure that AI technology is used responsibly and ethically in creative industries.