AI music platforms Suno and Udio have responded to copyright infringement lawsuits from major record labels, defending their use of copyrighted music for AI training.

Key points from their defense:

• Both companies openly acknowledged using major labels' recordings to train their AI models
• They argue this usage constitutes fair use under copyright law
• The companies claim their AI outputs create new works rather than direct copies
• They maintain that copying protected works for backend technological processes is legal
• The platforms assert that copyright law allows for soundalike outputs that don't contain actual snippets of original recordings

Their defense rests on two main arguments:

1. Training Process:

• Backend copying of protected works is legal when creating non-infringing products
• AI analyzes basic "building blocks of music" rather than copying specific works
• The process constitutes fair use under copyright doctrine

2. Output Legitimacy:

• Generated music may share characteristics with existing works but doesn't directly copy
• No actual snippets of original recordings are used in outputs
• Copyright law permits soundalike outputs that don't contain direct copies

The RIAA responded by:

• Highlighting the companies' admission of using copyrighted recordings
• Arguing that this "industrial scale infringement" doesn't qualify as fair use
• Stating that companies should obtain consent before using artists' work
• Referencing the Supreme Court's Warhol Foundation case as precedent

The case continues with both sides maintaining their positions on this crucial question of AI training rights and creative output legitimacy.

Related Articles

Previous Articles