A German court has ruled against AI music company Suno in a copyright lawsuit brought by collecting society GEMA, finding that the platform used protected musical works without authorization to train its generative AI models.
The Munich Regional Court ordered Suno to provide information about revenue connected to the infringement and to pay damages. The financial amount has not yet been set and will be determined in a later phase of the proceedings. The decision was issued at first instance, meaning it is not yet final and may be appealed.
GEMA filed the case in January 2025 on behalf of the songwriters, composers and music publishers whose rights it administers. The organization argued that Suno copied works from its repertoire during model training without obtaining the licenses required under German copyright law. Its complaint also pointed to generated tracks that it said closely resembled recognizable songs, including Alphaville’s “Forever Young,” Lou Bega’s “Mambo No. 5” and Boney M.’s “Daddy Cool.”
The court concluded that Suno did not have the right to make use of the relevant compositions in the manner challenged by GEMA. Beyond the eventual damages award, the revenue disclosure requirement could give the collecting society information needed to calculate its monetary claim.
Suno disputed the findings and said it was considering its legal options, including an appeal. In a statement, the company said its system was designed to help a wide range of users make original music and that it had trained its models to generate new songs rather than reproduce existing works. Suno also said it had implemented safeguards intended to prevent copying.
GEMA characterized the ruling as a victory for music creators and its chief executive, Tobias Holzmüller, said commercial AI services should not be able to exploit copyrighted music without compensating rightsholders. German Culture Minister Wolfram Weimer also welcomed the outcome as support for creators’ rights alongside clearer rules for the development of AI systems.
The case addresses one of the central legal disputes surrounding generative AI: whether developers can ingest copyrighted material when building models without first receiving permission from rightsholders. Music cases can raise multiple layers of rights because a composition and a particular sound recording are separately protected. GEMA’s action concerned works represented by the society, which licenses musical compositions and distributes royalties to its members and affiliated rightsholders.
AI music systems generate audio in response to user instructions, allowing people to request songs using descriptions of genres, moods or other musical characteristics. Rightsholders have argued that the technology’s commercial capabilities depend on protected catalogs used during development. AI companies, meanwhile, have defended their products as tools for creating new material and have contested allegations that model training or generated output necessarily amounts to infringement.
The Munich ruling is an important early European decision applying copyright rules to generative music training, although its effect may change if Suno appeals and a higher court revisits the findings. The unresolved damages phase also means the immediate financial consequences remain unknown.
Suno is separately facing litigation in the United States over its training practices. Lawsuits brought on behalf of major record companies, including Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music Group and Warner Records, accuse the company of using copyrighted sound recordings without authorization. Those proceedings are distinct from the German case and will be decided under US law.
For now, the Munich court’s order leaves Suno weighing whether to challenge the judgment while GEMA proceeds toward an accounting and damages determination.
Sources: AI copyright lawsuit