Licenses Versus Lawsuits: Why Suno’s Parallel Legal Strategies May Pose a ‘Conundrum’

Two years after the major record labels united to sue AI music firm Suno for using unlicensed music to train its artificial intelligence model, the company is now engaged in parallel legal battles and partnerships with different entities. While UMG and Sony continue to litigate Suno, accusing it of not paying for AI training data, Suno is forging new agreements with other prominent music companies.

BMG, not involved in the original lawsuit, recently signed a settlement deal with Suno, mandating the development of a new model based on licensed music. Warner Music Group, having exited the majors' copyright lawsuit, reached a similar arrangement with Suno this month. This creates a conundrum for Suno, as it simultaneously argues in court against UMG and Sony that it is exempt from paying for AI training data, while actively paying for training data from competitors.

David Martinez, a partner specializing in intellectual property litigation, suggests that Suno may be in a "little bit of a conundrum" regarding fair use. Fair use permits the reuse of copyrighted works for free under certain circumstances and has been supported by at least one U.S. judge in a case against Anthropic, the company behind the popular chatbot Claude.

However, a U.S. judge has yet to decide whether fair use applies to training on unlicensed music in Suno's case, though a German court recently ruled that it does not. Courts consider market impact, or the potential loss of income for copyright holders, when determining fair use. UMG and Sony argue that Suno's licenses with other music companies prove the existence of a market for such licenses.