Udio and Suno are being sued by the three biggest music labels: Universal, Sony, and Warner.
I learned about it from this video by music industry attorney "Miss Krystle", but for those of you who prefer text, I have a link to the complaint below so you can read that.
I'm really wondering how this is going to turn out. It seems everything depends on how you define "copying". In order to train AI models, copyrighted music is copied into GPU memory. Is this "fair use? But it is not copied into the models themselves. The models are a vast assortment of neural network parameters. If the models generate output that is extremely similar to the originals, does it count as "copying"?
Does the generated music count as a "derivative work", the way a remix would? Remixes take elements of the original music and recombine them in some new, and hopefully creative way. But to do that, those "elements of the original" are copied into the remix. But the neural network doesn't literally copy anything when generating new music -- the models are a vast assortment of neural network parameters. But when you listen to the generated music, you can definitely hear elements of the original music, especially if you ask for something very specific in the prompt, the the style of specific well-known artists.
I have no idea how the courts are going to rule on this.
Udio exposed: Massive lawsuit could end AI music | court document breakdown - Top Music Attorney
