Technology news and discussion on TalkFuse.
US musicians’ union files amended lawsuit against Universal and Warner over Suno and Udio AI deals
The American Federation of Musicians (AFM) has filed an amended lawsuit against Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group, accusing both major labels of breaching their union contract by licensing members' recordings to AI music generators Suno and Udio without paying or crediting the musicians involved. The case is significant because it tests whether labels can strike lucrative settlements with AI companies over past infringement while sidestepping obligations to the artists whose recordings underpin those deals, raising broader questions about how musicians share in AI-related revenue.
The amended complaint, filed on 24 July in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, names Warner Records and Atlantic Recording Corp alongside Universal Music Group, after Warner successfully argued its parent company was not a proper defendant. The union's claim rests on Article 21 of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement, which it says requires payment and notification when recordings are put to a "new use" not covered by the deal; the AFM argues that AI training qualifies and covers thousands of tracks. Both majors settled 2024 copyright suits against Suno and Udio in late 2025 and are now seeking dismissal, with Universal calling the union's reading of Article 21 too broad and Warner accusing the AFM of trying to influence negotiations; Judge Edgardo Ramos has allowed the amended complaint to proceed, with dismissal briefs due by 14 August and further briefing through 11 September.
In short
- AFM sues Universal and Warner over unpaid AI licensing of musicians' recordings
- Union says Suno/Udio deals trigger unpaid "new use" royalties under its contract
- Labels seek dismissal; court briefing continues through September 2026
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The AFM's strongest case is that Article 21 was designed precisely to protect musicians when their recordings are used in substantially new ways beyond the original contractual understanding. AI training represents a fundamentally different use of recordings than traditional licensing or distribution—the recordings serve as training data rather than being distributed to audiences. The labels are generating significant revenue from AI settlements whilst musicians, whose artistry underpins these deals, receive nothing, raising questions of fairness in how value is distributed along the chain.
The case against
The labels' strongest case is that 'new use' in recording industry contracts has a well-established meaning developed over decades of technological change, and licensing AI training is a legitimate contractual exercise that does not require renegotiation. The settlements with AI companies address copyright concerns separately. Treating AI licensing as triggering Article 21 obligations would effectively rewrite contracts retroactively and create standards where business cannot plan for any technological evolution. The union agreed to specific contractual terms and should not unilaterally expand their meaning through litigation.
Explained simply
The American Federation of Musicians is a union representing musicians in the United States, whilst Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group are two of the world's largest record labels. The union has filed a lawsuit claiming these labels licensed recordings to artificial intelligence music generators without ensuring the musicians involved were paid or credited.
This case raises a fundamental question about how money from artificial intelligence should be shared amongst everyone involved in creating music. If record labels make profitable deals with AI companies based on recordings made by their members, musicians argue they deserve a share of that revenue.
The union argues that when record labels license recordings to AI companies for training purposes, they should pay the musicians involved if such use wasn't covered by their original contracts. The labels dispute this interpretation, saying their existing agreements give them broad rights to license recordings.
AI Americas Entertainment Music Technology World