AI music startups accuse record labels of anti-competitive tactics
Suno and Udio, two startups that allow users to generate music using AI, have accused major record labels of anti-competitive behavior and acting to block new entrants into the music industry. The submissions come as part of separate legal filings against the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).
In June, RIAA separately sued Suno and Udio, accusing both companies of using copyrighted “sound recordings on a massive scale” to train their AI models. The Association, which represents major record labels such as Universal Music Group, Sony Music, and Warner Records, is seeking damages of up to $150,000 for every “unlicensed” song used.
AI startups say publicly available data is fair game
In its complaints, RIAA claimed that some songs generated by Suno and Udio resemble the work of famous artists such as Chuck Berry and ABBA which are owned by labels. One song generated by Suno called “Prancing Queen” contains lyrics to ABBA’s “Dancing Queen” and sounds like the band. Another reproduced the lyrics to “Johnny B. Goode” by Berry.
Users can create music on Suno and Udio by sending a text message to the generative AI models describing what they want the system to create. People have used Suno’s AI music technology over 12 million times since December last year, the company said in May.
Name that tune 🎶!
Sound familiar? That's because @suno_ai_ is training AI on copyrighted works…
🎧: https://t.co/GnRxCA0rDc
🎧: https://t.co/lr3Z7tHmyB
🎧: https://t.co/zXjPi68lJFLearn more about our legal action against Suno: https://t.co/LOFOSrRp9M pic.twitter.com/OmF7iUqAd7
— RIAA (@RIAA) June 24, 2024
In their defense, Suno and Udio admitted to using copyrighted material to train their AI music-generating models but argued this was fair use under law. The companies believe that they are being victimized by industry custodians who have little understanding of emerging dynamics in the world.
“Helping people generate new artistic expression is what copyright law is designed to encourage, not prohibit,” Udio said in its filing.
The company added that using existing sound recordings as data to analyze musical patterns and enable “people to make their own new creations is a quintessential ‘fair use’ under copyright law.”
AI training is like a kid learning to write rock songs
Suno released a blog post that broke down its response to the RIAA legal action. In the post, the outfit argued that RIAA chose litigation over innovation. Suno compared its training methods to a child learning music by listening to rock songs – something it says isn’t copying.
“The major record labels are trying to argue that neural networks are mere parrots — copying and repeating — when in reality model training looks a lot more like a kid learning to write new rock songs by listening religiously to rock music. Like that kid, Suno gets better the more our AI learns,” the company wrote.
Suno claims that people who use its music generator are doing so to create original music. “They are not trying to recreate an existing song that can be heard somewhere else on the internet for free,” it said, adding:
“But, even if they were trying to copy existing music, we have myriad controls in place to encourage originality and prevent duplicative use cases.”
Suno and Udio pointed out that many AI companies, including OpenAI and Google, utilize publicly available data for training. The firms say they should not be treated differently.
However, the Recording Industry Association of America insists that neither startup got the consent needed to use copyrighted works. The group said if not defended, artists will be driven out of business and will not have a way to make a living.
