Sony Music has filed a new lawsuit against AI music generator Udio, claiming it found more than 30,000 of its songs inside the company’s AI training data — and that’s just the tip of the iceberg. The record label says the 30,117 tracks named in the lawsuit are only a fraction of what it believes Udio copied without permission, with a forensic review allegedly identifying “hundreds of thousands” of Sony-owned recordings in the training dataset. Artists named in the filing include Beyoncé, Michael Jackson, Harry Styles, Mariah Carey, Elvis Presley, and many more.
If you’ve been following the AI music space, you know this is the second time Sony has taken Udio to court. The first lawsuit, filed last year, accused Udio of “mass infringement of copyrighted sound recordings.” But it was only during discovery in that earlier case — when Sony got to inspect Udio’s source code and training data — that the true scale of the alleged copying became clear. According to the lawsuit, Udio didn’t just scrape audio from the web; it used a tool called YT-DLP to “stream rip” music from YouTube, bypassing the platform’s protections to create permanent copies for AI training.
The Growing Pains of AI Music Generation
Here’s the thing: the 30,000 songs in the lawsuit might sound like a staggering number, but Sony says it’s just a sample. “The 30,117 sound recordings asserted in this action may more closely reflect the breadth of Udio’s infringement, in reality they remain only a small portion of Plaintiffs’ works that Udio infringed,” the filing states. Sony is seeking damages of up to $150,000 per infringed recording, along with an injunction to stop further copyright infringement. Do the math on 30,000 songs, and you’re looking at a potential liability of $4.5 billion — a number that would cripple any startup.
Udio has previously admitted its AI models were trained on “a vast amount of different kinds of sound recordings,” which “presumably included recordings whose rights are owned by the Plaintiffs.” But the company maintains that training AI on copyrighted music qualifies as fair use — a legal argument that has been gaining traction in some AI circles but remains deeply contested in the music industry. The new lawsuit specifically targets that defense, pointing out that Udio’s recent licensing deals with Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group weaken its position. “Udio’s belated embrace of licensing only underscores the unlawfulness of its decision to copy Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings, without a license, in the first place,” Sony argues.
Inside the Discovery: 30,000 Songs and Counting
This case is a microcosm of the broader tension between AI companies and rightsholders. The music industry has watched as AI-generated songs have flooded streaming platforms — some mimicking popular artists so convincingly that they rack up millions of plays. An AI song recently hit number one on iTunes, and a Japanese AI metal band became real after its creator hired human musicians to perform the AI-generated compositions. The line between homage and infringement has never been blurrier, and lawsuits like this one are trying to draw it.
But the timing of Sony’s new lawsuit is also interesting. Udio has been scrambling to legitimize itself, signing licensing deals with major labels. Sony’s argument that those deals prove Udio knew it needed permission is a strong one. If Udio truly believed fair use covered its training, why would it bother paying for licenses? That contradiction could be a major problem for the AI company in court.
What Comes Next for AI Music and the Law?
For now, the lawsuit is in its early stages. Sony is seeking a permanent injunction that would effectively shut down Udio’s ability to generate music using Sony-owned recordings. If successful, it could set a precedent that forces every AI music generator to either license their training data upfront or face crippling damages. That would reshape the entire industry — potentially making it harder for smaller players to compete, but also ensuring artists are compensated when their work is used to train the machines that might one day replace them.
Udio’s fair use defense isn’t dead yet, but it’s on life support. The company has already admitted its training data “presumably” included Sony’s copyrighted works. Now it has to convince a judge that copying hundreds of thousands of recordings to build a commercial product is a transformative use. That’s a tough sell, especially when the output of those models can be tuned to sound exactly like Beyoncé or Michael Jackson. The music industry is watching closely, and so is every other creative sector wondering whether AI will be a tool or a thief.
Comments (0)
Loading comments…