SOCAN sues Suno in Canada over alleged copyright infringement

The complaint was filed in Canada’s Federal Court on 3 September, following separate lawsuits against Suno in the United States by artist and activist David Lowery and Latin music label Gerencia 360.

SOCAN alleges that Suno used a large number of works belonging to its members without obtaining the necessary licences. According to the complaint, the alleged use enabled Suno to train its AI models and build a commercial platform whose generated music can be “identical or substantially similar” to existing copyrighted works.

SOCAN further alleges that Suno was aware that its safeguards against users generating material resembling copyrighted works were inadequate. The organisation argues that the platform’s guardrails demonstrate Suno’s knowledge of the alleged infringement.

The Canadian performing rights organisation has included comparisons between copyrighted works written by Canadian artists, including ‘Life Is a Highway’ and ‘Sk8er Boi’, and music generated through Suno that it alleges infringes those works.

SOCAN is seeking CA$10 million in punitive and exemplary damages, alleging that Suno knowingly and wilfully disregarded the rights of its members. It is also seeking a share of profits arising from the alleged infringement or, alternatively, statutory damages of CA$20,000 for each work found to have been infringed.

The case adds to a growing series of copyright disputes involving Suno and other generative AI companies over the use of protected music in AI training and the nature of music generated by such systems.

In Germany, music rights organisation GEMA secured a copyright ruling against Suno in July, although the company has appealed the decision. In the US, several rights holders and creators have also pursued legal action against AI music companies, with some cases focusing on whether the use of copyrighted material to train AI models can qualify as fair use.

The legal questions remain unsettled. A ruling that establishes the use of copyrighted works for AI training as permissible could affect several lawsuits involving AI companies, although separate questions could arise over whether AI-generated outputs reproduce protected elements of existing works.

Suno has also reached settlements or agreements in some recent copyright disputes. In August, the company resolved cases involving Jamendo and another plaintiff, while it also entered into a licensing agreement with BMG and Concord, avoiding a potential legal dispute with the music companies.

The SOCAN case is therefore part of a broader legal debate over how copyright law should apply to generative AI, particularly where systems are trained on large collections of copyrighted music and subsequently used to produce new works for commercial purposes.

The outcome could have implications for music rights organisations, artists, publishers and AI companies as courts in different jurisdictions consider the boundaries of copyright protection in AI development.