Suno's Dual Legal Approach Raises Questions as It Settles with Some Labels While Fighting Others
Suno is negotiating licensing deals with Warner Music and BMG while still facing copyright lawsuits from Universal and Sony. Legal experts note that paying for training data from some companies contradicts its fair-use defense against others. The company's $5.4 billion valuation adds stakes to the conflicting strategies.
Suno's legal strategy now splits along company lines: it has reached licensing settlements with Warner Music Group and BMG, while Universal and Sony continue pressing their copyright suits. The Warner deal reportedly obligates Suno to build a new model using licensed material, and BMG signed a similar arrangement this month. Suno's $5.4 billion valuation underscores the commercial stakes behind these competing approaches.
The fair-use question remains unsettled in U.S. courts, though a German court recently ruled against such a defense for music training. Universal and Sony have pointed to Suno's Warner agreement as evidence that a licensing market exists, arguing this undercuts Suno's claim that unlicensed training causes no market harm.
This dual-track approach could reshape how AI music companies negotiate with rights holders. If Suno's settlements with some labels are used as evidence against its fair-use defense, other AI firms may face pressure to license rather than litigate. Artists and smaller labels could see licensing revenue streams emerge, while consumers may gain clearer rules about AI-generated music's legality. The outcome may influence industry-wide norms for training-data compensation.