Common Music Group and Sony Music Leisure have requested a federal courtroom for permission so as to add greater than 61,000 copyrighted sound recordings to their copyright infringement lawsuit in opposition to AI music generator Suno.
The movement, filed on Thursday (Could 21) within the US District Courtroom for the District of Massachusetts, which you’ll be able to learn right here, comes after the file firms used audio fingerprinting know-how to determine their recordings inside Suno’s coaching knowledge.
The unique criticism, filed in June 2024, asserted 560 copyrighted works.
Decide F. Dennis Saylor IV, who’s presiding over the case, would want to grant the movement earlier than the extra works are added to the lawsuit.
Suno opposes the request, in line with the plaintiffs’ submitting.
In accordance with the plaintiffs’ memorandum of regulation supporting the movement, which you’ll be able to learn right here, discovery revealed that Suno used “thousands and thousands” of their copyrighted sound recordings to coach its AI fashions.
The labels say they’re asserting “solely a small fraction” of these recordings, 61,026 works, within the proposed second amended criticism.
In its unique reply to the criticism, Suno admitted that “the tens of thousands and thousands of recordings that Suno’s mannequin was skilled on presumably included recordings whose rights are owned by the Plaintiffs on this case.”
However, in line with the labels’ submitting, Suno “continued to refuse to determine the sound recordings it had used to coach.”
The file firms say they had been “compelled to undertake a pricey and burdensome assessment of Suno’s voluminous coaching knowledge” as a result of Suno “declined to supply any transparency outdoors of the invention course of.”
To determine their works inside the coaching knowledge, the plaintiffs used Audible Magic, an industry-standard audio fingerprinting know-how.
The method required a two-stage process.
In Stage 1, the plaintiffs’ consultants created digital fingerprints of every audio file in Suno‘s coaching knowledge – a course of that required two journeys to a safe room at Suno’s outdoors counsel’s workplace, totaling two full weeks of labor.
In Stage 2, these fingerprints had been transmitted to Audible Magic to verify for matches in opposition to its content-recognition database.
The submitting describes protracted disputes between the events over using Audible Magic.
Suno initially agreed to allow Stage 1 of the evaluation in June 2025, in line with the submitting, however then rescinded its consent on July 8, 2025, citing unresolved disputes over Stage 2.
The events appeared earlier than Justice of the Peace Decide Paul Levenson on July 31, 2025, who “expressed skepticism about Suno’s safety issues and prompt a compromise,” in line with the plaintiffs’ submitting.
An settlement was reached in October 2025, and the plaintiffs started Stage 1 on November 3, 2025.
The Audible Magic evaluation was accomplished on January 2, 2026, with ultimate match outcomes delivered to the plaintiffs on January 15, 2026.
The labels then undertook what they describe as a guide, multi-step course of to compile their expanded checklist of works from the Audible Magic outcomes.
For Sony, that course of concerned figuring out works believed to be registered with the Copyright Workplace, compiling registration certificates, manually wanting up corresponding ISRC numbers, and evaluating these in opposition to the Audible Magic match outcomes.
For Common, the method included creating lists of works asserted in prior litigation, manually looking for and confirming rights, and conferring with artist representatives.
The plaintiffs say they “may have devoted extra time to reviewing the entire set of Audible Magic outcomes and figuring out and asserting each copyrighted work infringed by Suno,” however “focused on a consultant subset” as a way to advance the litigation.
In accordance with the submitting, Suno‘s place is that the modification “would successfully begin the case over” and that it’s “entitled to an expeditious decision of its honest use protection.”
The labels say that argument is “meritless,” arguing that “the reason for any delay was Suno‘s ongoing refusal to supply Plaintiffs with the information in its possession.”
“Denying go away to amend on that floor would successfully reward Suno for copying copyrighted works on an unprecedented scale after which hiding that copying from public view,” the memorandum states.
The plaintiffs have proposed that Suno‘s honest use protection be addressed on abstract judgment earlier than ownership-related discovery for the brand new works is accomplished – a construction they are saying would “moot any of Suno’s delay-focused objections.”
The movement additionally notes that the proposed modification provides works to an present declare somewhat than introducing a brand new authorized idea, and that no extra discovery from Suno shall be wanted.
The submitting additionally features a proposed second amended criticism that reasserts allegations from a prior proposed amended criticism filed in September 2025, which alleged that Suno obtained recordings by “stream-ripping” them from YouTube in violation of 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a).
That earlier movement for go away to amend – filed in September 2025 – stays pending.
Warner Music Group – previously a co-plaintiff within the case – settled its lawsuit in opposition to Suno and struck a licensing take care of the corporate in November 2025.
The Warner entities had been voluntarily dismissed from the case in January 2026.
UMG and Sony stay lively plaintiffs, and their licensing negotiations with Suno have reportedly stalled.
The 2 remaining labels have additionally fought to acquire the phrases of Suno’s settlement with Warner Music.
In discovery, UMG and Sony requested all paperwork regarding Suno‘s plans to change its enterprise following the Warner licensing settlement, in addition to post-February 2025 supplies concerning its efforts to license coaching knowledge.
Justice of the Peace Decide Levenson rejected that request on April 6, ruling that, “as Suno argues, settlements of litigation have little persuasive bearing on figuring out and characterizing markets for mental property.”
The labels objected on April 20, arguing the Warner deal will not be merely a backward-looking settlement however “a forward-looking industrial association.”
Suno responded on Could 4, accusing the labels of making an attempt to “relitigate a dispute they misplaced.”
The case was initially filed in June 2024 alongside a parallel lawsuit in opposition to rival AI music generator Udio.
The newest scheduling order, entered in March 2026, units a deadline for dispositive motions of January 8, 2027.
That deadline could should be revised if the courtroom grants UMG and Sony‘s movement to amend.
Individually, on Friday (Could 22), Sony Music Leisure filed a parallel movement for go away to amend within the Udio case, looking for so as to add 30,442 copyrighted works to that criticism.
As within the Suno case, the plaintiffs say they recognized the extra works after having access to Udio‘s coaching knowledge in discovery, in line with the most recent courtroom submitting, which you’ll be able to learn right here.Music Enterprise Worldwide
