As the world’s largest record labels take aim at AI-generated music, the targeted companies are pushing back, setting the stage for a legal battle that could redefine the intersection of artificial intelligence and copyright in the digital marketplace.
Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group filed lawsuits Monday (June 24) against Suno and Udio-maker Uncharted Labs, alleging unauthorized use of copyrighted material. In response, Udio has defended its practices, asserting that its technology is designed to avoid reproducing copyrighted works, while Suno has yet to publicly address the allegations. This clash between music industry giants and AI companies could have far-reaching implications for how AI-generated content is created and used across various eCommerce platforms.
The lawsuits, coordinated by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), allege that these AI companies have built their services by “copying decades worth of the world’s most popular sound recordings” without proper licensing or compensation.
“Unlicensed services like Suno and Udio that claim it’s ‘fair’ to copy an artist’s life’s work and exploit it for their own profit without consent or pay set back the promise of genuinely innovative AI for us all,” RIAA Chairman and CEO Mitch Glazier said in a news release.
Generative AI music program Soundraw founder and CEO Daigo Kusunoki told PYMNTS, “We’ve always cared about musicians’ and songwriters’ creativity, and from the very beginning, we wanted to release a product that didn’t jeopardize the legal rights of artists. We always knew that IP would be an issue, and our vision aligns with the creators and labels of the world.”
In a similar case, a legal dispute between The New York Times and OpenAI centers on the use of copyrighted content for training large language models. In late 2023, the Times filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging that their AI models were trained on millions of its articles without permission or compensation. The newspaper asserts this constitutes copyright infringement and threatens its business model. OpenAI contends that its use of publicly available web content for AI training falls under fair use. This case is seen as a potential landmark in determining how copyright law applies to AI development, with significant implications for the future of both journalism and artificial intelligence.
The legal battle highlights the growing tension between traditional content creators and AI-powered platforms, a conflict that extends beyond music into the eCommerce sector. As AI-generated content becomes more prevalent in online retail, from product descriptions to customer service chatbots, the outcome of these lawsuits could set important precedents.
The implications for eCommerce are significant. Many online retailers have begun exploring AI-generated content to enhance customer experiences and streamline operations. However, the legal challenges faced by Suno and Udio serve as a cautionary tale for businesses considering integrating AI-generated content without proper consideration of copyright issues.
RIAA Chief Legal Officer Ken Doroshow emphasized the need for responsible AI development, saying in a news release: “These lawsuits are necessary to reinforce the most basic rules of the road for the responsible, ethical, and lawful development of generative AI systems and to bring Suno’s and Udio’s blatant infringement to an end.”
The music industry’s proactive stance on AI regulation could inspire similar actions in other creative sectors, potentially affecting how eCommerce platforms source and use content. Online retailers may need to reassess their strategies for incorporating AI-generated materials and ensure they have proper licenses and permissions.
While AI promises to enhance some aspects of eCommerce, from personalized recommendations to virtual shopping assistants, these lawsuits underscore the importance of balancing innovation with respect for intellectual property rights.
As the legal proceedings unfold, eCommerce businesses will be watching closely. The outcome could influence how AI is integrated into online retail platforms, potentially leading to more stringent guidelines for using AI-generated content in commercial applications.
The music industry’s stance, as articulated by Glazier, suggests a willingness to work with AI developers under the right conditions: “The music community has embraced AI and we are already partnering and collaborating with responsible developers to build sustainable AI tools centered on human creativity that put artists and songwriters in charge.”
This approach might serve as a model for other industries grappling with the integration of AI, emphasizing collaboration and respect for creators’ rights as crucial principles in developing AI technologies for eCommerce.
The lawsuits also highlight specific concerns about the training data used by AI companies. According to the legal filings, the music labels allege that it’s “obvious” what Suno and Udio’s music generators were trained on. They state that their models could only succeed in producing such realistic songs if they had been trained on “vast quantities of sound recordings from artists across every genre, style, and era.”
In response to the allegations, Udio said in a blog post: “We are completely uninterested in reproducing content in our training set, and in fact, have implemented and continue to refine state-of-the-art filters to ensure our model does not reproduce copyrighted works or artists’ voices.”
For all PYMNTS AI coverage, subscribe to the daily AI Newsletter.
We’re always on the lookout for opportunities to partner with innovators and disruptors.
Learn More