Following a lawsuit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) against music generation startups Udio and Suno, the latter has admitted in a court filing that it trained its AI model using copyrighted songs. However, Suno asserts that this practice falls under the fair use doctrine, sparking a significant legal debate.
The RIAA filed the lawsuit on June 24, accusing Udio and Suno of using copyrighted music to train their AI models without proper authorization. In the recent filing, Suno’s CEO and co-founder, Mikey Shulman, openly stated that their model was indeed trained on recordings owned by the plaintiffs.
“It is no secret that the tens of millions of recordings that Suno’s model was trained on presumably included recordings whose rights are owned by the Plaintiffs in this case,” the filing states.
Suno Defense
In a blog post published alongside the legal filing, Shulman defended Suno’s actions by arguing that their use of data from the “open internet,” which includes copyrighted materials, is akin to a “kid writing their own rock songs after listening to the genre.”
“Learning is not infringing. It never has been, and it is not now,” Shulman added. He emphasized that training models using publicly available data should be considered fair use.
The RIAA responded strongly to Suno’s admission. They accused Suno of industrial-scale infringement, stating, “It’s a major concession of facts they spent months trying to hide and acknowledged only when forced by a lawsuit. Their industrial scale infringement does not qualify as ‘fair use’. There’s nothing fair about stealing an artist’s life’s work, extracting its core value, and repackaging it to compete directly with the originals.”
The case raises complex questions about the application of the fair use doctrine to AI model training. The outcome will likely set a significant precedent, potentially influencing the future of AI development and the protection of intellectual property rights.
Key Points to Consider
- Fair Use Doctrine: Traditionally, fair use has been a flexible concept, allowing for certain uses of copyrighted material without permission. However, its application to AI model training remains a gray area.
- Impact on Artists: The RIAA argues that the practices of startups like Suno could undermine artists’ ability to earn a living from their work, highlighting the economic implications of AI-generated content.
- Legal Precedents: The decision in this case could establish a legal framework for how AI models can be trained using copyrighted material, influencing future lawsuits and regulations.
As the case against Udio and Suno progresses, it will be closely watched by both the tech and music industries. The resolution will likely shape the legal landscape for AI development and intellectual property rights, determining how startups can utilize existing content to innovate and create new technologies.
See also: Copyright Office Urges Congress To Outlaw AI-Powered Impersonation
