Suno copyright case in Germany ends in loss to GEMA
A Munich court found Suno used GEMA songs without a license, adding pressure on AI music companies over training data and outputs.
By Sofia Marchetti · Columnist
· 3 min read
The Suno copyright case in Germany produced a court loss for the AI music startup after the Munich Regional Court sided with GEMA, the German music rights organization. For retail investors tracking generative AI businesses, the decision shows how copyright licensing can reach both the data used to build AI tools and the content those tools create.
Variety reported that the court found Suno infringed copyright by using songs from GEMA’s catalog to train its AI models and by reproducing protected works without permission. The ruling requires AI companies to secure licenses for commercial use of GEMA’s repertoire, including AI model training and AI-generated music, according to the report.
AI model training is the process of feeding data into a system so it can learn patterns and produce new outputs. In music, that can mean using recordings or compositions to teach software how songs are structured, which is why rights groups are pushing courts to decide whether licenses are needed before those works can be used.
What did the German court decide in the Suno case?
The court found that Suno needed authorization from GEMA for the use of protected songs in its catalog, Variety reported. The case focused on six songs, including “Daddy Cool,” “Rasputin,” “Forever Young” and “Mambo No. 5.”
GEMA accused Suno of training its AI on copyrighted songs without permission. The ruling gives the rights organization a win in its effort to apply existing music copyright rules to generative AI systems that can create new songs from user prompts.
Suno rejected the court’s view. In a statement, the company said its platform was designed to let people make new music rather than copy existing songs. Suno said it trained its models to create original tracks, added protections to its service and disagrees with the ruling.
The company also said the decision mischaracterizes how its technology works, how people use it and how U.S. law applies. Suno said it is reviewing its legal options, including a possible appeal.
Why the ruling adds pressure on AI music firms
The German decision arrives as Suno faces wider scrutiny over how its models were built. Earlier this month, Decrypt reported that leaked source code showed Suno’s training data included more than 113,000 hours of YouTube Music, 62,000 hours from Pond5 and 12,000 hours from Deezer.
Decrypt reported that the leaked material supported music industry claims that Suno trained on copyrighted recordings without permission. Suno continues to fight those allegations in court.
GEMA has also scored a separate recent win involving AI and music copyright. About eight months before the Suno ruling, the organization won a case against OpenAI in Munich, where a court found that ChatGPT unlawfully reproduced copyrighted song lyrics.
Taken together, the cases show that courts in Germany are becoming an important venue for testing how copyright law applies to generative AI. For AI companies, the practical question is whether training data and generated outputs require negotiated licenses from rights holders before commercial use.
This story draws on original reporting from Decrypt.
