Munich Court Protects Musicians Against AI Use, Rules Against Suno
Munich, August 1st – The Munich Regional Court has issued a decisive ruling against Suno, a US-based AI music generator, prohibiting the unauthorized use of copyrighted songs. This judgment, following a complaint from the German music rights society Gema, significantly strengthens the copyright protection for artists whose works are used to train AI models.
The 42nd Chamber of the court found clear violations of copyright law and ordered Suno to cease its activities, provide information, and pay damages. Only minor aspects of Suno’s defense were upheld by presiding judge Elke Schwager.
The verdict is not yet legally binding, and Suno is exploring various options, including an appeal. While the case specifically concerned six songs or parts thereof, its implications are expected to extend far beyond these particular works.
Six Famous Songs at the Core of the Dispute
According to the court, the case centered on six well-known musical pieces: “Atemlos,” “Daddy Cool,” “Mambo No. 5,” “Big in Japan,” “Forever Young,” and “Rasputin.” The court was convinced that Suno’s AI model had been trained with these songs and could recognizably reproduce them during Gema’s tests.
Judge Schwager’s oral explanation of the verdict alone lasted an hour and a half, highlighting the complexity of the case. Several central questions were addressed during the proceedings.
Are Songs Stored in the AI?
This question is crucial for copyright law. If songs are stored, it constitutes a reproduction, which is a violation without proper authorization or justification. AI providers, including Suno, typically deny this, claiming their models only learn and do not store content.
However, the court, like Gema, reached a different conclusion. Judge Schwager stated that it is illogical for songs to be used during training and then recognizably reproduced without copyright being involved in between. This decision echoes a similar ruling from last November, where Schwager also presided. In that case, Gema sued OpenAI because its chatbot ChatGPT had reproduced protected song lyrics either entirely or largely identically, leading the judge to also conclude that storage had occurred.
Conversely, other rulings on this matter have differed. Last year, a British court ruled against the US image agency Getty Images, concluding that AI models had only learned from their photos but had not stored them.
Jurisdiction of a German Court Confirmed
The jurisdiction of the Munich court was also a point of contention, particularly regarding the AI’s training, which took place in the US. Judge Schwager firmly affirmed the court’s jurisdiction, citing a specific regulation for rights management societies. This regulation allows them to file lawsuits at the location of an infringement and then include other infringements from different locations in the same complaint.
The court also addressed whether US law’s “fair use” principle protected the training. The court concluded it did not, partly because the music data was accessed despite download protection and because it was used for commercial purposes.
Suno Held Responsible for All Preceding Steps
On the controversial point of whether Suno or the user is responsible for the output, the court made a clear statement: since Suno is responsible for all preceding steps, the provider also bears responsibility for what its music generator produces.
Reactions to the Verdict
Gema expressed great satisfaction with the ruling. Gema CEO Tobias Holzmüller called it “a good day for creators and probably for European culture.” He added that the court had clearly identified Suno’s activities as what they are: “theft of intellectual property.”
Holzmüller believes the verdict will have a significant impact, partly because it demonstrates that copyright infringements can be pursued from outside the US. Gema aims to compel Suno and other AI companies to acquire licenses.
Suno, however, views the verdict differently. “We disagree with today’s ruling. It is based on a misrepresentation of how Suno’s technology works and is used, and how US law applies. We are currently reviewing all available options, including an appeal.”
Rockstar Peter Maffay, who is involved with Gema and attended the verdict announcement, described it as a very important day for artists. He stated that the ruling protects their claims and rights. He clarified that he is not against AI but believes artists must be involved in the results derived from their creative substance.
Minister of State for Culture Wolfram Weimer (non-partisan) said the ruling clearly shows that the protection of human creative achievements is indispensable and also applies to providers of generative AI. He emphasized that technological development and the protection of intellectual property must be meaningfully linked. “We need a legal framework that strengthens innovation and creativity and ensures that rights holders are adequately compensated. This also includes their participation in the value creation through AI,” Weimer clarified.
Source: https://www.antenne.de/nachrichten/bayern/gericht-staerkt-urheberrechte-gegen-ki-musikfirma-suno
