Suno & Udio Reportedly Explore Major Label Litigation Settlements

Nearly one year after suing Suno and Udio for copyright infringement, the major labels are reportedly exploring possible settlements with the gen AI music platforms – including a licensing and compensation framework.

Rumblings of the potential resolution discussions just recently entered the media spotlight. At the time of writing, however, neither the majors nor the AI-platform defendants had publicly addressed the matter; Suno and Udio didn’t respond to requests for comment in time for publishing.

But according to Bloomberg, the settlement discussions are ongoing, with the majors pushing for licensing fees and “small” equity interests in the AI upstarts. Additional details are few and far between, though the same source claimed that the talks “are happening in parallel.”

This doesn’t exactly come as a surprise given the cases’ considerable overlap and the fact that both Udio and Suno have tapped Latham & Watkins for representation. (Udio is also repped by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan.)

That said, it’s unclear whether there’s weight to the same report’s indication that the dual negotiations are “creating a race of sorts to see which” AI company will settle first.

To state the obvious, preventing (extremely) protracted courtroom confrontations can bring inherent advantages.

Here, avoiding even bigger attorneys’ fees would certainly qualify as one such advantage. Meanwhile, the majors would have the opportunity to invoke the resulting terms in licensing talks with other AI platforms, and Suno as well as Udio would put an end to an apparently thorny discovery process.

“Given the complexity of the case, the number of discovery requests at issue—to date, over fifty RFPs from each side— and the number of Plaintiffs and Asserted Works, this process has been a complex one that has required careful attention and compromise on both sides,” counsel for Udio and the majors summed up in an early May update.

Plus, “the parties spent several months negotiating the protocols that govern Plaintiffs’ inspection of Udio’s source code and training data,” they wrote.

With all this said, the settlement “race” description doesn’t necessarily paint a full picture of the situation. Most significantly, Suno and Udio remain adamant that their training processes constitute fair use.

As broken down by DMN Pro, the central argument is deceivingly strong from a legal perspective, and litigation wins aren’t guaranteed for the majors should the cases play out. In other words, it’ll be especially interesting to see whether the rumored back-and-forth resolves the cases and sets the stage for different AI licensing models throughout the wider industry.