German court confirms: Music cannot be used as raw material for AI services without consent
The Munich Regional Court has issued a landmark copyright ruling in the legal dispute between the German collective management organization GEMA and the AI music service Suno. The ruling confirmed that AI services cannot use copyrighted musical works created by humans without the permission of and appropriate remuneration to rights holders. The judgment is an important victory for music creators and publishers and a significant precedent for the entire European creative sector.
The case involved a U.S.-based AI platform Suno, whose service allows users to generate complete songs from text prompts. GEMA brought legal action against Suno, arguing that the company had used copyrighted musical works to train its AI model without authorization and without compensating creators and publishers.
Suno Found Guilty of Clear Copyright Infringement
The Munich Regional Court upheld GEMA’s claims and found that both the use of copyrighted musical works to train an AI model and the reproduction of AI-generated content constitute copyright infringement.
According to the judgment, protected works are incorporated into the Suno AI model in a reproducible form. The model therefore memorizes the protected works and thefore retains copies of protected works rather than merely learning from them by extracting information without storing it. GEMA was able to prove that Suno had collected copyrighted music as training material, including from YouTube, by circumventing the platform’s technical protection measures. The court also found that the unauthorized reproduction of protected works in AI-generated outputs and the provision of such a model to the public constitute copyright infringement.
The court rejected Suno’s argument that an AI model trained in the United States could be offered in Germany without permission from rightsholders on the basis of the U.S. “fair use” copyright exception. The decision therefore makes it clear that services offered within the EU must comply with EU legislation, even if the actual training took place in the United States.
The ruling also confirmed that responsibility for copyright infringement lies with Suno itself, not with users who use the service and type the text prompts.
Under the court’s decision, Suno may no longer use copyrighted musical works without the consent of rightholders. The company was ordered to pay damages and to provide GEMA with information on revenues derived from illicit activities. Suno retains the right to appeal the decision to a higher court.
A significant ruling for the entire creative sector
This case is at the moment one of the most important European legal decisions assessing how copyright law applies to the development of generative artificial intelligence and AI-generated content. It is the first ruling to address complete musical works, including compositions, melodies, harmonies, rhythms, and arrangements.
Last year, GEMA also prevailed in legal proceedings against OpenAI concerning song lyrics. In that judgment, OpenAI was found to have used protected song lyrics without authorization in its ChatGPT model.
GEMA’s copyright lawsuit against Suno is not the only case brought against the AI tech company. Legal proceedings are also currently pending in Denmark, where the collective management organization KODA has filed a similar copyright infringement case against Suno. In addition, major international record companies have initiated lawsuits against Suno in the United States for alleged infringement of their rights.
Generative AI cannot use music as free raw material
Generative AI refers to services that create new content, such as text, images, or music, based on user prompts. In music services, this may involve generating an entire song.
GEMA was able to demonstrate in court that Suno’s service generates songs that closely resemble copyrighted works belonging to its rights holders. Using the lyrics and musical style of original songs, Suno created works whose musical elements were nearly identical to those of the original compositions.
According to the court’s ruling, an AI service must obtain permission and pay remuneration if it uses protected music to train its model or generates new music based on such works.
GEMA CEO Tobias Holzmüller has emphasized that the goal is not to fight AI companies but to establish a fair licensing market.
“All generative AI is based on human creativity. Today, the court made it clear that generative AI service providers must obtain a license and cannot use our members’ works free of charge. The judgment also confirmed that, when AI service providers operate their systems in Europe, claims can be brought against them in European courts. This is vital for efficient enforcement of copyrights.”
The court’s decision is also important because services such as Suno can generate enormous volumes of new music very quickly. If such music is commercially exploited without compensating the creators of the original works, the consequences will be significant for the entire music ecosystem. According to economic analyses, as much as 25–30% of music creators’ income could be at risk if unauthorized AI-generated music replaces human-created music without providing remuneration to creators.
The Decision Supports the Development of a Fair Licensing Market
The goal of Teosto and the whole global creative sector is to ensure that the use of music in AI services is based on transparency, licensing, and fair remuneration. Music creators and publishers must be able to decide how their works are used and be remunerated for such use.
Risto Salminen, CEO of Teosto, considers the ruling a strong message to technology companies and to the European creative sector as a whole.
“The judgment reinforces a fundamental principle: music is not free-of-charge raw material for AI services. The development of AI can also create opportunities for the music industry, but only if it is built on rules that respect the rights of creators,” says Salminen.
Teosto is currently working together with other European collective management organizations to further develop legislation and licensing practices related to AI and copyright. The objective is to create a model in which the use of works is agreed upon at different stages of AI development and deployment. This includes agreements covering the use of protected content in AI model development, the provision of AI services, and the exploitation of AI-generated content based on copyright protected works.
In May 2026, Teosto decided on changes to the rights it manages in order to facilitate more flexible licensing agreements concerning AI-related uses of music represented by Teosto.
Teosto believes it is essential that legal framework and practices governing the relationship between generative AI and copyright support European culture, creative work, and a sustainable music sector. AI is a useful tool in the music industry as well, but its development must not come at the expense of music creators and publishers.
For further information:
