Music label companies Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and Sony Music Group sued AI startups Suno and Udio in June, arguing that the companies had trained their AI model by collecting copyrighted material from the internet.
Now, according to Engadget, Suno has confirmed that its AI model was indeed trained on copyrighted material from all three major music companies — but it argues the training counts as “fair use” under US law. This means the use of the material constitutes an exception to copyright regulations.
“It is fair use under copyright law to make a copy of a protected work as part of a technological process, which is invisible to the public, in order to create a new end product that is not infringing,” Suno wrote in a statement.
Not surprisingly, the music companies disagree. “Their industrial infringement does not qualify as ‘fair use,’” said a spokesperson for the music labels in response to Suno’s claims. “There is nothing fair about stealing an artist’s life’s work, extracting its core value and repackaging it to compete directly with the originals. The defendants had a legal way to bring their products and tools to market — to obtain consent before using their works, as many of their competitors have already done. Unfair competition is directly relevant in these cases.”
Music label companies Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group and Sony Music Group sued AI startups Suno and Udio in June, arguing that the companies had trained their AI model by collecting copyrighted material from the internet.
Now, according to Engadget, Suno has confirmed that its AI model was indeed trained on copyrighted material from all three major music companies — but it argues the training counts as “fair use” under US law. This means the use of the material constitutes an exception to copyright regulations.
“It is fair use under copyright law to make a copy of a protected work as part of a technological process, which is invisible to the public, in order to create a new end product that is not infringing,” Suno wrote in a statement.
Not surprisingly, the music companies disagree. “Their industrial infringement does not qualify as ‘fair use,’” said a spokesperson for the music labels in response to Suno’s claims. “There is nothing fair about stealing an artist’s life’s work, extracting its core value and repackaging it to compete directly with the originals. The defendants had a legal way to bring their products and tools to market — to obtain consent before using their works, as many of their competitors have already done. Unfair competition is directly relevant in these cases.” Read More
Related posts:
Platform lets creators monetize their content for use in LLM training
Platform lets creators monetize their content for use in LLM training
Where does Apple Intelligence come from?
Apple Intelligence doesn’t use YouTube, but does it matter?
The U.S. Copyright Office Plans a Webinar on the Copyright Public Records System
CCC Takes a Big Step in Helping to License Copyrighted Materials in AI Systems