Major record companies sue Suno, Udio for ‘massive infringement’ of copyright

Among the AI ​​music generators that can create perfect songs in no time, Suno and Udio are considered by many to be the best.

They are also considered by many to have used copyrighted music to train their AI models, without authorization.

Now, i Recording Industry Association of America (The RIAA) coordinates lawsuits on behalf of major recording companies against two AI companies.

Sony Music Entertainment, World Music Group‘s UMG recording, again Company Warner Records Inc. are among the plaintiffs in two new copyright infringement lawsuits filed on Monday (June 24).

A controversial case Suno was filed in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, and the case against it The sound was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, regarding what the RIAA called “massive infringement of copyrighted sound recordings copied and exploited without permission by two multi-million dollar music production services.”

“AI companies, like all other businesses, must comply with laws that protect human intelligence,” complaints against the Suno and Udio states. “There is nothing that exempts AI technology from copyright law or excuses AI companies from playing by the rules.”

That assertion is likely to be the main point of contention in the lawsuits. US courts have yet to rule on whether using copyrighted material to train AI amounts to copyright infringement.

Many technology companies are involved in developing AI technology, including Anthropic again Googlehave argued that using copyrighted material to train AI should be considered a “fair use” of copyright law, as, in some cases, it is permissible to use copyrighted material in the creation of new technologies or products.

However, music companies and other copyright holders argue that this does not apply to artificial AI, as this technology can be used to create material that directly competes with the copyrighted material being used. AI music generators are able to create market-competitive songs against copyrighted songs used for training.

“When those who develop such [AI music services] stealing copyrighted sound recordings, i [services’] artificial music output may flood the market with machine-generated content that will directly compete, cheapen, and ultimately put an end to real audio recording [services were] designed,” said the legal complaint.

“The music community has embraced AI and we are already partnering and partnering with responsible developers to build sustainable AI tools focused on human creativity that puts musicians and songwriters in charge.”

Mitch Glazier, RIAA

In a statement shared with the media on Monday, the RIAA asserted that the use of copyrighted songs to train AI music generators fails all four tests used by US courts to determine whether the “fair use” exemption applies.

“Fair use is not found if the output seeks to ‘alter’ the copied work. And Suno and Udio, in their own words, admitted that this is exactly what they intended,” RIAA said.

“The music community has embraced AI and we’re already partnering and partnering with responsible developers to build sustainable AI tools focused on human creativity that put musicians and songwriters in charge,” RIAA Chairman and CEO. Mitch Glazier said the statement.

“But we can only succeed if the engineers are willing to work with us. Unlicensed services like Suno and Udio that say it’s ‘okay’ to copy an artist’s life’s work and exploit it for personal gain without permission are holding back the promise of AI for all of us.”

The recording industry trade group also said that Suno and Udio “admitted” to using proprietary material to train their AI.

The RIAA pointed to the comments of the first investor in Suno, Antonio Rodriguezwho all admitted that Suno used copyrighted material when he said he was against Suno signing license agreements with copyright holders, saying “if [Suno] I had deals with labels when this company started, I probably wouldn’t have invested in it. I think they needed to make this product without restrictions. “

The group also asserted that Udio executives’ comment that their AI was trained on “a lot of publicly available and high-quality music” “found on the Internet” and that it was “the best quality music out there” was actually an admission that they used “recordings with the rights of RIAA member companies .”

The RIAA also asserted that ($125 million-backed) Suno and (Andreessen Horowitz-backed) The sound “caught” using copyrighted material.

“They left producer tags on their produce. The ‘CashMoneyAP’ and ‘Jason Derulo’ tags are present on Suno’s output,” the RIAA said.

“Users have popularized many audio recordings using Suno and Udio, including The Temptations’ My little girlGreen Day’s American idiotby Mariah Carey All I want for Christmasand recordings by Chuck Berry, James Brown, and others.”

“These lawsuits are necessary to strengthen the basic rules of the road for the responsible, ethical, and legal development of productive AI systems and to end Suno and Udio’s flagrant violations.”

Ken Doroshow, RIAA

This echoes the official analysis of Suno- and Udio-produced music by Ed Newton-Rexwho was the head of music at AI stabilitywho founded the non-profit AI accreditation organization Properly Trained.

In an analysis published by MBW, Newton-Rex found a striking similarity between the music created by Suno and the works of Ed Sheeran, ABBA, Oasis and others. In a different analysis, he found similarities between the music produced by Udio and the works of John Lennon, Natalie Imbruglia, Coldplay and others.

“In addition, in some cases, the defendants’ services reproduce unintelligible voices for popular recording artists, including Lin-Manuel Miranda, Bruce Springsteen, Michael Jackson, and ABBA,” the RIAA said.

“These are specific cases of copyright infringement involving the unlicensed copying of sound recordings on a large scale. Suno and Udio are trying to hide all the details of their violation of the law instead of putting their services in a sound and legal place,” it said. Ken Doroshowthe RIAA’s chief legal officer.

“These lawsuits are necessary to strengthen the basic rules of the road for the responsible, ethical, and legal development of productive AI systems and to end Suno and Udio’s flagrant violations.”

The lawsuits led by the RIAA against Suno and Udio come after several other lawsuits were filed in the US against AI developers in the past year.

Among them there is a case involving World Music Group, Concord again ABKCO as plaintiffs, arguing that Anthropic AI chatbot Claude has been extracting copyrighted words and passing them off as original.

A number of bloggers have sued the owner of Facebook and Instagram Meta Platforms and the creator of ChatGPT OpenAI for allegedly infringing copyrights on their books. They argue that Meta’s LLaMa AI model and OpenAI’s ChatGPT have created “derivative functions” in their literature.

Like the RIAA-led lawsuits against Suno and Udio, much will depend on whether the courts accept the notion that using copyrighted material to train AI constitutes “fair use,” or is copyright infringement.

It’s possible that more lawsuits in the music industry against AI developers are on the way.

In May, Sony Music Group (SMG) sent letters to 700 AI developers, as well as music streaming services, informing them that the company is “coming out” that their music has been used to train AI models.

The letter also asserted that “we have reason to believe that you and/or your affiliates may have made unauthorized use… of SMG content in connection with the training, development or sale of AI systems.”Music Business Worldwide