AI Music Licensing: What Suno & Udio’s Deals Mean for Artists
Alright, let’s talk about something that’s been buzzing in the music world—AI-generated music and how the big players are handling it. If you’ve been following the drama between AI startups like Suno and Udio and the major record labels, you know things have shifted fast.
A year ago, Universal, Warner, and Sony were suing these AI companies for copyright infringement. Now? They’re sitting at the table trying to cut licensing deals.
What changed? And more importantly—what does this mean for musicians, producers, and songwriters?
From Lawsuits to Licensing: The Major Labels’ Pivot
Last summer, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) accused Suno and Udio of training their AI models on millions of copyrighted songs without permission. The labels wanted these startups shut down—or at least forced to pay up.
But now, according to reports, the labels are negotiating licensing fees, equity stakes, and even veto power over how these AI tools evolve.
What’s in the Deals?
- Fees & royalties – Labels want compensation for past and future use of their catalogs.
- Equity stakes – Just like they did with Spotify, majors could own a piece of these AI companies.
- Content ID-style tracking – A system to detect when AI-generated music resembles existing songs.
- Veto power – Labels want control over features like voice cloning and remix tools.
But here’s the catch: labels don’t own everything.
The Missing Piece: Songwriters & Composers
Gadi Oron, CEO of CISAC (a global org for music creators), points out a big problem:
“Labels can only license the rights they control—master recordings. But AI companies also need rights to the underlying compositions and lyrics, which are managed by songwriters and publishers.”
In other words, even if Suno and Udio strike deals with labels, they might still be infringing on songwriters’ copyrights.
History Repeating Itself?
This feels a lot like the early days of streaming, when artists got sidelined in licensing deals.
- Musicians’ Union (UK) asks: “Will creators get a say—or any revenue?”
- Ivors Academy warns: “This looks like another power grab, not a fair deal.”
And it’s not just talk—GEMA (Germany’s music rights org) has already sued Suno over unpaid royalties.
Why Now? The Pressure Behind the Deals
1. Regulatory Uncertainty
The recent firing of U.S. Copyright Office Director Shira Perlmutter (who pushed back against AI “fair use” claims) has creators worried. If new leadership favors AI companies, lawsuits might get harder to win.
2. Investor Pressure
Suno raised $125M last year—investors want legal clarity before pouring in more cash.
3. Global AI Laws Are a Mess
- EU’s AI Act is strict but slow.
- UK might allow AI training exemptions.
- No global standard exists yet.
This chaos gives both sides a short window to shape the rules before governments step in.
What Do the Labels Really Want?
1. Fingerprinting & Attribution
Labels want AI models to track when they borrow from existing music—something like YouTube’s Content ID, but for AI.
2. Control Over AI Features
No surprise—they want veto power over tools like voice cloning or AI remixes.
3. Money (Obviously)
- Cash settlements for past infringement.
- Ongoing royalties based on usage.
- Equity stakes in AI companies.
But here’s the biggest concern:
“If labels set a low royalty standard now, it could hurt artists for years.”
The Future: Three Possible Scenarios
- Licensed Acceleration – Deals happen, AI music tools roll out, but artists get sidelined.
- Stalemate – Lawsuits drag on, AI keeps growing, and regulators step in too late.
- Patchwork Chaos – Some labels license, others don’t, leading to a fragmented mess.
The Big Unanswered Questions
- Can AI models really track stylistic influences, or just direct copies?
- Will voice rights be separate from music rights?
- How will royalties even be calculated? Per song? Per second?
- Could this lead to a compulsory AI license (like mechanical royalties)?
- If labels get equity, will artists see a dime?
Bottom Line: Who Really Benefits?
This isn’t just about money—it’s about control.
- Labels want a cut of AI’s future.
- AI companies want legal safety.
- Artists? They’re still fighting for a seat at the table.
As Benji Rogers (Sureel AI) puts it:
“Opt-in and opt-out rights must be non-negotiable. Without them, creators lose all power.”
Final Thought
If history’s any guide, the people who make the music won’t get the best deal—unless they demand it.
References & Further Reading
What do you think? Should AI companies pay artists directly, or is this just another label cash grab? Drop your thoughts below! 🎵🤖