Suno is pressing the judge overseeing its copyright dispute with major labels to reject an attempt by Universal and Sony to massively expand the list of allegedly infringed tracks, a move that could skyrocket potential damages to over $9 billion. This legal maneuver directly impacts the financial exposure of AI music companies and the future compensation models for songwriters, publishers, and rights holders whose work is used to train artificial intelligence systems without permission.
Labels seek billions in damages
Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment have requested to increase the number of specific tracks named in their copyright lawsuits against Suno from 560 to 61,026. Under US copyright law, copyright owners can seek up to $150,000 per infringed work. By expanding the list, the majors are increasing the damages they could seek from $84 million to more than $9.1 billion. The two majors argue they were unable to provide these larger lists initially due to a lack of transparency from the AI companies regarding the music used to train their models. They claim the initial shorter lists were created through a highly manual process, while the expanded lists became possible only after the AI companies were forced to share information during the discovery phase of the legal battle.
Judge blocks expansion in parallel case
In a parallel lawsuit against Udio, Judge Alvin Hellerstein recently ruled that it was too late for Sony to increase its track list from 560 to 61,026. Hellerstein stated that expanding the list at this late stage would require substantial additional production and review, generate further disputes, and materially alter the scope of the case. Suno’s lawyers have now written to Judge David Saylor, who oversees the Suno case, arguing that every consideration leading Hellerstein to refuse the expansion in the Udio case is equally present or more material in the Suno case. Suno notes that the majors seek to assert 60,000 additional works in its case, which is twice the number at issue in Udio.
The lawsuits filed against Suno and Udio involve nearly identical claims for copyright infringement regarding the use of sound recordings to train AI models without permission. The primary difference is that Warner Music Group has settled with both Suno and Udio, whereas Universal has only settled with Udio and is still suing Suno. Suno argues that delaying the litigation to accommodate a larger track list would prejudice its ability to resolve its fair use defense, which asserts that AI training is fair use under US law and does not require permission from copyright owners. Suno contends that the disruption would be even more significant in its case because depositions are already underway and a deadline for dispositive motions has been set.
For editorial consideration and industry coverage inquiries, contact Radio Facts.
