German court rules against Suno in GEMA AI copyright case

The Munich Regional Court reportedly ordered Suno to disclose information about its revenue and pay damages. The company has said it disagrees with the ruling and is considering an appeal.

GEMA brought the case against Suno over allegations that the AI company used copyrighted works from its members to train its models without authorisation. The collecting society also argued that Suno’s technology could generate audio content that was substantially similar to existing musical works.

The dispute also raised questions about whether the use of copyrighted material to train AI systems can be protected under the fair use doctrine in the United States, where Suno’s models were allegedly trained.

In a summary of its decision, the Munich Regional Court said copies of musical works had been made during the training process in the US and that US copyright law therefore applied to alleged infringements occurring there.

The court also distinguished the case from two US cases involving AI companies Anthropic and Meta, in which courts found that certain uses of copyrighted works for AI training could qualify as fair use. According to the German court, the key difference was that Suno’s systems could produce outputs containing elements substantially similar to the original works following simple, open-ended prompts.

The court also reportedly found Suno liable under German copyright law in relation to the storage of its AI models on servers in Germany, as well as the reproduction and public performance of allegedly infringing soundalike recordings.

Suno disputed the court’s findings and said it was assessing its legal options.

“We built Suno around a core belief: to empower everyone to experience the joy of making music,” a Suno spokesperson said. “Our tools give people the ability to create new songs, whether they are top artists, product developers, songwriters using our tools in their workflows or everyday music fans.

“From the beginning, we trained our models to create new songs, not reproduce existing ones, and built protections into our platform. We disagree with today’s ruling – which rests on a fundamental mischaracterisation of how Suno’s technology works, how it is used and how US law applies – and are evaluating all available options, including an appeal.”

The decision marks another legal victory for GEMA as copyright holders and AI companies continue to dispute how protected works may be used in the development of generative AI systems.

GEMA general counsel Kai Welp said the case demonstrated the need for further regulation of AI systems in Europe.

“It is astonishing that the AI systems apparently store almost complete works to a considerable extent,” Welp said. “We were able to prove this with our methods and the recent scientific literature also indicates that this is only the tip of the iceberg.

“It is also very pleasing how the legal situation in the USA is assessed, and that we can sue in Munich regardless of where the training takes place. This is a huge step for the creatives. However, in order to effectively enforce our rights and prevent providers from moving to copyright-hostile countries, we will also need the support of the European legislator.”

The ruling comes as Suno faces wider scrutiny over the use of copyrighted music in AI development and as the company pursues licensing agreements with music industry stakeholders. The case is expected to remain subject to further legal proceedings if Suno proceeds with an appeal.