After record labels sued Suno and Udio in 2024 over allegations of copyright infringement, the companies have been moving toward negotiations aimed at securing a foothold in an industry that initially rejected them.
Suno’s CEO Mikey Shulman described the company’s goal as working with music industry players rather than against them, saying he believes “working together with the music industry instead of against the music industry is the only way that this works.” He said music is “so culturally important” that there should not be an “AI world and a non-AI world of music.”
At the same time, Shulman’s pitch for cooperation comes against a backdrop of legal pressure that has shaped how both startups operate. Sony Music, Universal Music and Warner Records filed lawsuits in 2024 accusing Suno and Udio of exploiting recorded works. The litigation has proceeded in federal courts, with cases involving both Boston and New York, while Suno also faces challenges in Europe brought by groups representing music creators.
Suno has taken a step it described as reconciliation after years of friction with major labels. The company said it settled with Warner Records, while Udio has signed licensing agreements with Warner, Universal and independent label Merlin. The same legal fight has remained active with Sony Music, which the report said had not settled with either startup as the companies pursue arrangements with other labels.
Udio has also adjusted its product in a way that drew backlash from some users after a settlement deal with Universal. After the first settlement involving Udio and Universal, the report said an exodus of frustrated Udio users occurred when downloads of their AI-generated tracks were blocked. Still, Udio’s CEO Andrew Sanchez told the Associated Press he is optimistic about future changes, saying, “Having a close relationship with the music industry is elemental to us,” and arguing that “Users really want to have an anchor to their favorite artists. They want to have an anchor to their favorite songs.”
Artists and rights advocates remain divided, and some continue to question whether licensing agreements will address what they view as the core problem: how AI systems are trained on existing music and how creators are compensated. Tift Merritt, who co-chairs the Artists Rights Alliance, said the “economy of AI music is built totally on the intellectual property, globally, of musicians everywhere without transparency, consent, or payment,” adding that her concern is that the technology can replace working artists.
Merritt’s criticism fits into a broader campaign by musicians pushing for licensing deals and partnerships rather than platforms built without regard for copyright law. The report said Merritt helped organize a “Stealing Isn’t Innovation” campaign that includes artists such as Cyndi Lauper and Bonnie Raitt, and that an open letter co-signed by Merritt and others urged artists to avoid trusting Suno, which is described as being sued for copyright infringement.
The leaders’ view is that legal and technical change are moving at different speeds. Shulman contends that technology “evolves very often faster than the law,” and he said Suno aims to be thoughtful about “not breaking the law” while still “deliver[ing] products that the world really wants.” He also addressed an earlier controversy from the industry’s first confrontation with Suno, when a clip circulated in which he was quoted as saying it was “not really enjoyable” to make music most of the time—later telling the AP that he “clearly” wished he had “said different words” and describing the context as a distinction between repetition needed for perfect results and the broader idea that “music is amazing,” with him playing “every day for fun.”
Sanchez, meanwhile, framed Udio’s identity as different from a typical tech-company crusader. He said tech firms often “actively cultivate this I-am-a-tech-company-crusader and that’s part of their identity,” which he said “alienates people who are creative” and that he is “uniformly opposed to that.” He added that he does not expect all artists to embrace AI, but he said he hopes conversations clarify that Udio is not imposing a kind of “AI bravado,” and argued that if people could view the work without emphasizing the word AI, “people would be like, ‘Oh my gosh. This is so cool.’”
Some artists describe that coolness as a creative possibility rather than a threat. The report included the example of Christopher “Topher” Townsend, who creates and markets gospel music under a persona while using tools that include ChatGPT for lyrics and Suno for song generation and other AI tools for promotional materials. Townsend said he can understand why artists might fear AI, but he also pointed to the appeal of an automated singer, saying “(Solomon Ray) has an immaculate voice,” does not “get sick,” does not need “leave” and does not “get injured,” and that it can “work faster than I can work.”
Other professionals see generative AI as a tool that can expand access. Jonathan Wyner, a professor at Berklee College of Music in Boston, said to the Associated Press that to creative musicians, AI represents “both enormous potential benefits in terms of streamlining things” and making “kinds of music-making possible” that were not available before, as well as making the process “more accessible to people who want to make music.” But even as some creators experiment, the legal and licensing decisions now underway suggest that how the technology fits into the commercial music system will remain contested—at least until rights holders see deals that match their expectations for transparency, consent and payment.