The clash between artificial intelligence and the music industry is escalating. Major record labels, including Sony Music, Universal Music Group, and Warner Music Group, are suing AI music startup Suno. They accuse the company of downloading copyrighted songs from YouTube without permission to train its technology. The case, now before a Massachusetts federal court, could shape how AI companies gather training data.
At the Center of the Dispute
At the center of the dispute is “stream-ripping,” a process that bypasses YouTube’s encryption system to pull audio files directly. The labels argue this practice violates Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which prohibits circumventing access controls. In their October 20 filing, the labels’ lawyers stressed, “The violation lies in the circumvention, not the reason for it.” They insist that even if Suno claims fair use, the method of acquiring recordings was unlawful.
Suno has not denied using stream-ripping. On October 3, the company asked the court to dismiss the new allegations. Its lawyers argued that the DMCA targets access restrictions such as paywalls, not copy controls. They described the amended lawsuit as “a gambit to try to evade application of the fair use doctrine.” Suno maintains that fair use protects its use of copyrighted material for AI development.
Labels Push Back
The labels counter that fair use cannot excuse unlawful access. They wrote, “If Suno wanted fair use to shield it from liability entirely, it could have acquired its training data lawfully. Instead, it chose a cheaper and faster route: stream-ripping from YouTube.” They also cited a 2001 decision in Universal City Studios v. Corley, noting that “Fair use has never been held to be a guarantee of access to copyrighted material.”
Beyond the courtroom, Suno is attracting investor attention. On October 17, Bloomberg reported that the company is negotiating to raise more than $100 million in funding. That round could value Suno at over $2 billion. This highlights the tension between rapid AI growth and the music industry’s determination to protect intellectual property.
In summary, the case underscores a critical question: can AI companies rely on copyrighted works without permission, or must they find lawful alternatives? The outcome will influence not only Suno’s future but also the broader relationship between AI innovation and creative rights.
About the Author
