Sony Music filed a new copyright lawsuit against AI music platform Udio, expanding the case to 30,117 sound recordings and raising potential damages to $4.5 billion, after a judge blocked efforts to add the works to an earlier case.
Sony Music Entertainment has escalated its legal battle against AI music startup Udio, filing a second copyright infringement lawsuit that expands the number of sound recordings at issue from 333 to 30,117, with potential damages ballooning from $50 million to $4.5 billion. The move follows a ruling last month in which Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein denied Sony’s request to add the additional recordings to its original case, stating that doing so would substantially prejudice defendants and unduly delay the resolution of this action.
The Expanded Lawsuit and Its Implications
The new lawsuit, filed on Monday (July 20) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, asserts that Udio trained its generative AI models on unlicensed recordings, including 30,117 sound recordings identified through audio fingerprinting during discovery. Sony claims these represent only a small portion
of the total infringed works, with the company alleging that Udio’s training data included hundreds of thousands
of its recordings. The expanded case doubles down on Sony’s argument that Udio’s belated embrace of licensing
underscores the unlawfulness of its initial copying, as the AI platform has since struck deals with Universal Music Group (UMG), Warner Music Group (WMG), and other rights holders.
The lawsuit also highlights the legal risks of AI training, with Sony emphasizing that Udio’s licensing agreements with entities like Kobalt, Merlin, Believe, and the National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) prove a well-established mechanism of free-market licensing
exists for copyrighted works. A company that pays to license the very inputs at issue cannot credibly maintain that no market exists for those inputs,
Sony argues in its complaint.
Legal Arguments and Fair Use Debates
Sony’s legal team directly addresses the fair use defense, which Udio has raised to justify its training practices. The company contends that AI training does not qualify as fair use, particularly under the “market harm” factor, which requires courts to assess whether infringement harms existing licensing markets. Sony argues that Udio’s licensing deals with major labels and publishers contradict its claim that no market exists for the inputs it used.
The lawsuit also includes claims under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), alleging that Udio circumvented technological protections by “stream ripping” music from YouTube using the tool YT-DLP. Udio has acknowledged obtaining audio data from YouTube but maintains that its use of copyrighted music constitutes fair use. I recognize that plaintiffs have the right to seek to stop infringement of, and recover damages for, all copyrighted works. But there is no requirement that it be done in this lawsuit,
Judge Hellerstein wrote in his ruling, which Sony cites as justification for the new case.
Udio’s Defense and Market Claims
Udio, developed by Uncharted Labs and led by Andrew Sanchez, has not commented on the new lawsuit but has previously defended its practices as compliant with copyright law. The company’s legal team has argued that its training process falls under fair use, a contention that remains untested in courts. Sony’s complaint counters that Udio’s mad dash to become the dominant AI music generation service
has flouted copyright owners’ rights since its April 2024 launch.
The case also underscores the broader tension between AI developers and rights holders. While Udio has secured licensing deals with UMG, WMG, and others, Sony remains the sole major music company yet to reach a licensing agreement with Udio. The lawsuit seeks statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work infringed, plus $2,500 for each act of circumvention, along with an injunction.
The Broader Impact on AI and Copyright
Sony’s expanded lawsuit reflects the growing legal scrutiny of AI training practices, with similar cases targeting rival platforms like Suno. In the Suno case, Universal and Sony are seeking to add 61,026 recordings, more than double the 30,117 at issue in the Udio complaint. The outcomes of these cases could set critical precedents for how courts define fair use and liability in AI-generated content.
The dispute also highlights the financial stakes for both sides. For Sony, the potential $4.5 billion in damages hinges on proving that Udio’s training data included a minuscule, illustrative fraction
of the total infringed works, as the company claims. For Udio, the case represents a pivotal test of its business model, which Sony states should be based on the well-established mechanism of free-market licensing that ensures proper respect for copyright owners.
What Comes Next in the Legal Battle
The new lawsuit will now proceed alongside Sony’s original case, with the court likely to address whether the expanded dataset warrants a separate trial. The outcome could shape the legal landscape for AI companies seeking to train models on copyrighted material, with implications for the music industry’s approach to emerging technologies.
As the litigation unfolds, the case will be closely watched by AI developers, rights holders, and legal experts. Sony’s strategy of pursuing multiple lawsuits against different platforms signals a broader effort to establish clear boundaries for AI training practices. Meanwhile, Udio’s ability to defend its model—and secure licensing deals—will determine whether it can navigate the legal and financial risks of operating in a rapidly evolving industry.
Sources: Billboard, Music Business Worldwide.
Worth a look
