The RIAA’s Lawsuit Against Suno Puts AI Model Training Practices Under Scrutiny
- Fair Use Defense: Suno claims training its AI model on copyrighted music is protected under fair use.
- RIAA’s Lawsuit: The RIAA argues that Suno’s use of copyrighted material is industrial-scale infringement, not fair use.
- Potential Precedent: The outcome of this case could set a significant legal precedent for AI model training and copyright law.
AI music startup Suno is embroiled in a legal battle after the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed a lawsuit against it and fellow startup Udio. The RIAA alleges that both companies trained their AI models using copyrighted music without permission. In a court filing on Thursday, Suno admitted to using copyrighted songs for training but argued that this practice is legal under the fair-use doctrine.
Suno’s Fair Use Argument
Suno’s CEO and co-founder, Mikey Shulman, defended the company’s practices in both the court filing and a blog post published the same day. Shulman asserted that the AI models were trained on music available on the “open internet,” which includes copyrighted material. He likened this to a child learning to write rock songs after listening to the genre, arguing that “learning is not infringing.”
“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,” Suno’s filing stated. Shulman further emphasized that using publicly accessible music for training purposes should fall under fair use, drawing parallels to traditional learning processes that have long been considered non-infringing.
The RIAA’s Response
The RIAA’s reaction was swift and critical. They accused Suno of trying to hide the facts and only admitting to the use of copyrighted material when faced with a lawsuit. The RIAA’s statement underscored their position that Suno’s actions amount to industrial-scale infringement, which they argue cannot be justified as fair use.
“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’,” the RIAA said. They painted a dire picture of the future of music, suggesting that if Suno’s practices were allowed, it would undermine artists’ ability to earn a living and devalue their work.
The Larger Implications
The case against Suno is still in its early stages, but its outcome could set a crucial legal precedent regarding the application of fair use in AI model training. The debate centers on whether AI training on copyrighted material constitutes fair use, a question that traditional copyright doctrine has yet to definitively answer.
This legal battle is not just about Suno and Udio; it has broader implications for the AI industry. If the court rules in favor of the RIAA, it could impose stricter limitations on how AI companies can use publicly available data, potentially stifling innovation. Conversely, a ruling in favor of Suno could open the door for more liberal use of copyrighted material in AI training, significantly impacting how AI models are developed across various industries.
As the case progresses, the tech and music industries alike are watching closely. The decision will likely influence future AI model training practices and shape the legal landscape for AI and copyright law. For now, Suno continues to defend its practices, standing by its claim that training AI on open internet resources, including copyrighted music, is a legitimate application of the fair-use doctrine. The final ruling will either validate this approach or redefine the boundaries of fair use in the age of AI.