In June 2024, the RIAA sued Suno and Udio in federal court, alleging both AI music companies trained their generators on millions of copyrighted recordings without permission or payment. By late 2025, Warner Music Group had settled both suits and Universal Music Group had settled its Udio suit — each creating new licensed AI music services. Sony Music refused to settle and is still fighting both companies in court. Then in June 2026, the American Federation of Musicians — the union representing session musicians — filed its own lawsuit, arguing that whatever settlement money the labels collected, the musicians who actually played on those recordings deserve a direct cut too. NPR Planet Money brought the whole standoff into focus on August 18, 2026.

1. Training Is Fair Use (Suno, Udio)

The AI companies say they learned from music the same way any musician does — and what they generate is entirely new.

Training on music isn't the same as copying it. Suno and Udio argue that AI training is transformative use: the models learn musical patterns and structure, then generate new compositions — not stored copies of the originals. In court filings, Suno acknowledged using "essentially all music files of reasonable quality accessible on the open Internet" to train its model. Suno calls that legally protected fair use. Suno filed a summary judgment motion on those grounds in March 2026. The case doesn't go to dispositive motions until April 9, 2027. Suno raised $400 million at a $5.4 billion valuation in June 2026 — investors are betting the fair use argument holds.

2. The Deals Worked — for the Labels (Warner Music Group, Universal Music Group)

Warner and UMG say they solved this with licensing, and both frame the deals as wins for artists.

Warner and UMG turned lawsuits into partnerships. Warner settled with both Suno and Udio in November 2025, and Universal settled with Udio in October 2025. Warner CEO Robert Kyncl called the Suno deal "a victory for the creative community." Universal CEO Sir Lucian Grainge said the terms reflected a commitment to "do what's right by our artists and songwriters." The deals include artist opt-in controls over voice and likeness, and both labels are building new licensed AI music services.

Nobody said what they actually got paid. Neither label disclosed what it was paid. The deals cover label-level licensing only — they don't establish how, or whether, session musicians who played on the underlying recordings receive anything.

3. But Sony Isn't Done Fighting (Sony Music)

Sony says the only honest test of copyright is a courtroom, not a settlement negotiated under legal pressure.

Settling early let Suno and Udio off easy. While Warner and UMG were cutting deals, Sony kept fighting. In May 2026, Sony and UMG expanded their Suno complaint from 560 to 61,026 specifically named recordings — and called that count "only a small fraction" of the total copyrighted material in Suno's training data. At $150,000 per work for willful infringement, Sony's potential damages against Suno alone exceed $9 billion. On July 20, 2026, Sony filed a brand-new lawsuit against Udio naming more than 30,000 sound recordings — from Elvis Presley to Harry Styles — spanning seven decades.

4. And the Session Musicians Are Still Waiting (American Federation of Musicians, SZA, Tiffany Red)

The musicians who played on those recordings say all three camps cut them out.

Session musicians got zero from the label AI deals. The American Federation of Musicians filed suit on June 5, 2026 in New York against Warner and Universal, arguing the AI settlements triggered the "new uses" clause in the musicians' collective bargaining agreement — requiring labels to pay session musicians whenever their recordings go to a new commercial use. AFM president Tino Gagliardi said musicians need "consent for the use of their sound, credit, and fair compensation for their music." Warner and Universal both filed motions to dismiss by August 14, 2026, arguing no AFM agreement has ever set rates for AI use — so no payment is owed.

Independent artists have no union contract to stand on. In June 2026, artist SZA typed her name into AI Watchdog — a database journalist Alex Reisner built to track which songs appear in datasets AI developers share — and watched the count climb to 238 of her songs, including what she believes may be unreleased material. "Jus checked and music AI has trained off 238 of my songs," she posted. "I'm certain some unreleased." Grammy-winning songwriter Tiffany Red, founder of advocacy group the 100 Percenters, put it plainly: "Where's the money going, if they stole all of our music?"

Where This Lands

Suno and Udio are betting fair use covers AI training. They have $400 million and a 2027 trial date to ride that out. Warner and UMG say their deals prove the system can work, pointing to opt-in protections and new licensed services as evidence. Sony says only a courtroom verdict sets a real precedent. The AFM and independent artists say none of that changes the basic fact: the labels haven't paid the session musicians who played on those recordings, and a motion to dismiss is their answer to that.

Sources