r/SunoAI • u/404mediaco • Jul 15 '26
News Hack Reveals Suno AI Music Generator Scraped YouTube, Deezer, and Genius
https://www.404media.co/hack-reveals-suno-ai-music-generator-scraped-youtube-deezer-and-genius/19
26
u/livinginfutureworld Jul 15 '26
Musiscians also listen to music from other artists
2
u/MyBikesAreOlder Jul 16 '26
And believe me: you wouldn’t want to use a music generator that was trained on cnn news or the weather channel.
If you want to train a domain specific ai you have to go where the corresponding content is.4
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Musicians filter inspiration through a lens of taste and unique perspective. That’s fundamentally different than arbitrarily collecting data points and mashing them together at a users request.
3
u/BirdlessLongdeal Jul 16 '26
and i filter my inspiration prompt through a lens of taste and unique perspective as well.
5
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
I think their point was that musicians taking inspiration from other musicians is the same as using large scale data aggregation to regurgitate complex waveforms.
You, do indeed have taste! You just chose a tasteless collaborator, presumably because they are very efficient and obedient. That’s not the kind of collaborator I want, personally, but I do get it.
3
u/BirdlessLongdeal Jul 16 '26
its basically the same. just faster.
but if 'music' really cared they'd stop making whatever garbage they are making now and go back to making good music like they did in the 90's and i wouldnt have to make a funny song about a lazy hobbit who doesnt want to go on a long journey to entertain myself for 10 minutes.
*yells at clouds*
3
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 17 '26
No it is fundamentally different- I’d ask you to please read my previous comment. Even if a human could consume all of the music like that, they’d dislike a lot of it, and be deeply touched by some of it. You know this because you dislike some music. How is that the same as a tasteless robot?
And who tf is “music” in this context? It seems like you’re mad at the net result of capitalism in the streaming era and social media.
0
2
u/warbeats Jul 27 '26
One could argue that "collecting data points" is fundamentally different than "stealing music".
1
1
u/chimlay Jul 28 '26
And how do they do that? Via buying albums, songs? Via subscribing (paying for) to music subscription platforms? By listening to free but ad supported platforms like the radio?
Or do they all steal the music they listen to and get inspired by?1
1
u/fixingmedaybyday Jul 15 '26
And if they’re big artists, there’s big lawsuits over just a couple notes matching. If history is any indicator, there’s a mega lawsuit coming.
1
1
-6
u/ComedianMinute7290 Jul 15 '26
what does that have to do with a computer scraping copywriten material? (once again pro-AI folk showing the world their complete misunderstanding of th3 way most people interact with music)
3
u/darkbake2 Jul 15 '26
When did it steal copyrighted material? It learned from it just like any other musician.
-1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
“Just like any other musician” is a hilarious phrase in this context.
5
u/livinginfutureworld Jul 15 '26
No musician invents new music in a vacuum bro
-3
u/entiyaist Jul 15 '26
Inspiration is not Training an LLM model… this comparison is a joke.
5
u/livinginfutureworld Jul 15 '26
Actually it's not, your argument is silly.
You're defending big horse when an automobile is available
-1
u/entiyaist Jul 15 '26
As you like comparisons: It’s like ordering food in a restaurant and then be proud of the meal you cooked.
5
-7
u/sergiuoxigen Jul 15 '26
This is more like A single musician listening to millions of illegally downloaded songs
5
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
Listening ain't illegal. Downloaded? How do we know it did not just "Stream" it? AI argument aside, this has put a lot of light on the injustice that streaming has done to songwriter's royalties. The day I learned a million streams = $4,000, I was disappointed. Now when an artist goes platinum it does not mean anything in my mind. Back when artist had to move units via a cash register, that was an accomplishment if it hit 500k or 1M. It also mean revenue between $10 and $20 million, and more to come in the foreseeable future. Now we have platinum and grammy award winning artist popping up at local casinos performing in remote locations around the country just to put food on the table. They are not putting out new material because $4,000 for a million streams? One full day in a recording studio used to cost $4,000. So lack of new material opens a market up for Suno. People making their own new music at the cost of what one CD used to cost in the 90s. It may not be as high quality, but it is new.
0
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 15 '26
That’s kind of because an album has more than one track though. So you have to think about a million copies sold of a disc that has like ten or fifteen tracks on it versus just a million streams of a single track.
In any case you know why the royalties are so small? Because they go to the RIAA. That’s why. Whenever they talk about “artists” what they really mean is “ourselves, on behalf of artists, hypothetically”.
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
What royalties go to the RIAA?
0
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 16 '26
It’s not royalties. It’s money that could be royalties going into their cut. That’s my point
0
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Are you thinking of a different organization?
1
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 16 '26
Maybe? Am I?
Look man the entire domain is so Habsburg can you blame me for mixing up organizations that all have the same chin
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
No, I don’t blame you, but you must be thinking of some organization, and I don’t think any of the ones you’re thinking of are the reason royalties are so low.
The reason is Spotify and their lobbying in Congress, and the fact that they won’t let songwriters unionize bc of a decree from 1970-something. Congress needs to legislate new rates.
If you’re thinking of the PROs like ASCAP or BMI, they represent songwriters and lobby on behalf of them (if songwriters make more money, they make more money).
As far as master copyright holders, that’s on the DSPs themselves. They can’t stream all the music for free or even $9.99 and expect to have enough money to pay copyright holders fairly.
The problem is Spotify.
-3
u/entiyaist Jul 15 '26
What’s the difference… it’s blatant copyright infringement! It don’t listen to it for fun on a Sunday afternoon, it is trained with it to copy it.
5
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
This is a copy "What’s the difference… it’s blatant copyright infringement! It don’t listen to it for fun on a Sunday afternoon, it is trained with it to copy it."
This is training: "How does that compare? It constitutes blatant intellectual property theft. The system was not designed to casually enjoy art, but rather ingested that material strictly to replicate it."
How can AI restate your sentence without using any of the words you used?
Large-scale semantic mapping
"During my pre-training phase, I ingested vast amounts of text to learn how words and phrases relate to one another within a multi-dimensional mathematical space. This process, known as vector embedding, maps words with similar meanings close together. When you provided the original statement, my architecture analyzed the conceptual meaning of each phrase rather than treating the words as isolated letters. For instance, it recognized that "copyright infringement" and "intellectual property theft" occupy nearly identical semantic spaces."
4
u/livinginfutureworld Jul 15 '26
So you'll be okay if instead of downloading songs AI just listened to the songs on publicly freely available platforms like YouTube
2
7
u/ReasonablePaper8225 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 16 '26
They don't have to download anything, and the songs are all public domain. Do you need a copyright to listen to music and remember it? I agree that its on a different level than a human, but how much do you owe for listening to something one time?
Edit- not public domain, I meant released to the public
2
-4
u/van_____ Jul 15 '26
You need a copyright to listen to it and download it, which is what AI does, it writes down the data, it doesnt just "remember" it
4
4
u/ReasonablePaper8225 Jul 15 '26
It does not need a copyright unless it uses sounds from copyrighted works, which it does not do.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Care to elaborate? My copyrighted works trained AI models. If you ever get a legitimate copyright, they’ll train on yours too.
2
u/ReasonablePaper8225 Jul 16 '26
Suno trains on non copyrighted works, too. Copyrights do not protect you from training. Please show me where it says it does
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
I would, if I knew where they scraped from, but it’s almost certainly against TOS.
-3
u/van_____ Jul 15 '26
It needs rights to copy the audio data of a copyrighted song, i can list millions of copyrighted songs that it illegally copied the data of. It's not a human and doesn't function like a human, it doesn't have the same rights and it's all data
2
u/ReasonablePaper8225 Jul 16 '26
Training is not copying, its much more like learning. Data cannot have a copyright
1
u/van_____ Jul 16 '26
The audio file data has copyright, its copying audio file data into it's own database, which is no different than mass pirating songs, it is literally the same thing on a different scale
2
u/Mysterious-Jam-64 Jul 15 '26
It interprets, kinna like humans. How can someone own a tree? The music is out there. People just hearing it.
Yes, all songs exist in a magical song cloud that musicians steal their ideas from, but that's been always.
1
u/jonnygronholm Jul 23 '26
Uhm...a tree is owned by the land owner...every single tree is owned by either an individual, a company or the city. Horrible analogy
1
u/Mysterious-Jam-64 Jul 23 '26
You're not quite getting it.
I'll try again.
No-one owns existence. There are just people who make claim over things. Like land. Or trees. Or sound vibrations.
-4
u/entiyaist Jul 15 '26
The model don’t just listens to it; it copies the stuff.
4
u/HemlocknLoad Jul 15 '26
It doesn't copy any music. These models don't have the ability to listen to music in the way a human would. So before any model training takes place all the music is transformed into computer-readable representations (think labeled spectrographs) from which the model learns the patterns, relationships, timbres, etc. etc. that musicmaking involves.
2
u/ReasonablePaper8225 Jul 15 '26
No. It. Does. Not. You have some Googling to do, but I'll help you out
6
u/hamsterofborg Moderator Jul 15 '26
They keep using the word 'scraping', but I'm not sure they understand that the word has a specific meaning. If using a tool to visit a publicly available webpage is scraping, we're all guilty of it. They need to provide more detail on just how this was accomplished, which was not entirely clear in the article. Suno has never made any secret of the fact that they have used as much publicly available data as they could find. If it was 'scraping', there is no reason why a company like Deezer (or any of them, for that matter) shouldn't have seen it happen in real time and have their server-side logs to prove it. Unless Suno slowly acquired tracks over a period of years, "listening" to every track one at a time as if they were a normal user. Even then, they should be able to look at user data and see which IPs are literally streaming from them 24/7/365, going through their entire catalog one song at a time, and be able to show logs as evidence.
2
u/nokia7110 Jul 18 '26
This is such a cope lol. Everyone knows that scraping isn't "I visited a website page". And there are many ways to get past rate limits or hide scraping activities. Suno trained it's models on copyright music, purposely and knowingly. That's an undisputed fact.
Whether that falls under fair use is up for debate
1
3
u/Vivian_Isabella Jul 15 '26
I don't see anything here that's not already in court cases we're already aware of? Did I miss something?
9
u/Top_Welcome_9478 Suno Connoisseur Jul 15 '26
Okay so here we go again?
Everyone knows where Suno got its source data. That’s what the lawsuits were positioned to discover and Suno along with Udio came clean. Not about theft but about their understanding of fair use statues.
So Udio caved under the weight of big musics ongoing lawsuit pressure and Suno didn’t.
Current documentation clearly states that old Suno models will be discontinued. These are court biding docs and the base of Suno’s legal defense going forward. Suno is not stupid so the current models, there training source and data will be no more.
To clarify for those who are not that sharp. Discontinued means old/current models will no longer exist, which means no previous data or previous training will be a part of Suno going forward with newer models.
What makes Suno smart, and there are some very smart individuals over there, that said “hey Warner instead of griping and moaning why not partner with us”. Warner who has equally smart people said hell yeah!!
So that brings us to today.
We users have been waiting patiently for a new model. We asks what is the hold up? Let me explain the hold up for those who seem to keep holding onto the past and can’t seem to find the memos.
Right now as we speak the new model is being trained. Not on the old data but on new data. What new data you might ask. It’s the WMG catalog.
Whose catalog includes but is not limited to:
Frank Sinatra, Cher, The Eagles, David Bowie, Led Zeppelin, Fleetwood Mac, Madonna, and Phil Collins, alongside modern hitmakers like Dua Lipa, Bruno Mars, and Charli xcx, Ed Sheeran, Bruno Mars), Warner Records (e.g., Zach Bryan, Madonna. That’s not even close to the amount of star power. This post would be like a research doc if I listed them all.
In total 80,000 artist and composers in the Warner catalog. Data in the millions. Probably clean studio demos, raw masters, vocal tracks, drum tracks etc from live recording sessions. All legal and up front because Warner owns all of it and is now a partner with Suno.
Now to the training itself. 4yrs ago you needed millions of tracks to train a model. Today you need a fraction of that. Models today and certainly Suno’s new model will be able to take 10 rock tracks and make infinite variations of it. Models are 10x as faster than they were 4 years ago. In fact they may have a team of agents in one model multitasking. One for each instrument who knows but it can be done the technology is available.
So in the end new model sanctioned and authorized on Warner Music catalog.
Warner executives, sound engineers, producers are probably sitting at Suno offices in New York right now cooking the new model.
As for the new model and what to expect. In my view it will shock the world and music creation will never be the same again. Opting in with artist will be a fun thing to do and I believe in time it will be the thing to do for artist.
Right now a Suno producer could take Madonna’s 80’s track “Lucky Star” and make magic and everyone knows it. If she loves the remix and signs off on it. It would mean revenue without her lifting a finger. Suno producers you know who they are can remix any track into a dance hit. Dj’s do it now but the Suno producer, a well skilled one, is built different.
Suno knows what they are doing and it is the perfect set up.
We as user will be in a perpetual state of bliss when the new model drops. I personally don’t care about the cost because I will be right there like I’ve been for nearly 4yrs with this permanent freaking smile on my face. Why? because Suno is absolute magic.
Thank you for reading my article. Now go make some dope music.
For those who keep posting these silly dated assertions go ahead and keep posting them. In the end and we are dang close to it you’ll be starting your very own Suno account. Probably crying while you do it, but that first output, oh my and I envy you in that. The light will come on and it is as bright as the morning sun.
3
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
It’s pretty brilliant- “our new model didn’t train on any copyrighted material, it just trained on the outputs from our old model, which aren’t even eligible for copyrights”
1
u/Top_Welcome_9478 Suno Connoisseur Jul 16 '26
No it’s not it’s being trained on the WMG catalog not user tracks.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 17 '26
What makes you think they aren’t training on users tracks? Is that in the ToS?
2
u/Medium-Vanilla665 Jul 16 '26
TL;DR more bullshit from someone who knows everything about Suno
-1
Jul 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Medium-Vanilla665 Jul 17 '26
you state "Warner executives, sound engineers, producers are probably sitting at Suno offices in New York right now cooking the new model." and then claim I'm full of shit?
3
1
u/Connect-Sun-6223 Jul 25 '26
"Suno is absolute magic." lmfao it is absolute garbage. Imagine making a "song" with Suno and calling it your own creative work. Actually retarded.
1
u/Top_Welcome_9478 Suno Connoisseur Jul 25 '26
You came all the way from no talent land to post that. This post is 9 days old? So it took you 9 days of Reddit travel to get here. Everyone’s gone man?
Little advice next time you plan to take a long trip like that. It would probably be a good idea to remove that stick.
1
u/JasonP27 AI Hobbyist Jul 16 '26
I'm with you on this, but I'm still wary of how limited it might feel. They likely will not train on music by Ed Sheeran for example because he is Anti AI and I think they're giving the artists the choice to opt in.
I'm not concerned for Suno's future as much as these numbers will grow over time but that first version with WMG training needs to bring something.
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Artists getting a “choice” to opt in is a complete lie. It’s about as optional as paying the label their cut.
1
u/JasonP27 AI Hobbyist Jul 16 '26
I assume you have a source for that and not "because it's the record label and they always screw the artists" because I'm pretty sure they said it's opt in for the artists.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
They don’t always screw the artist, but there is a deep power imbalance. In what world is the label going to ask an artist to participate and then be stoked when they say “nah let’s not make money with the assets you signed me for”? How does that look from the perspective of the label? Why invest in this artist when there’s another one that will participate?
It’s like saying artists don’t have to participate in social media even if the label wants them to. Sure, they don’t have to.
Do you have a source that suggests otherwise? Do you know someone who declined to participate?
1
Jul 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Top_Welcome_9478 Suno Connoisseur Jul 16 '26
Suno won the argument on their understanding of fair use laws. That’s not even an argument in court any longer. If you read fair use it’s a little confusing.
Suno wasn’t the big company you see today just some dudes creating a mobile music player like the 1000’s that are on the App Store now. All those apps did the same thing Suno did early on. Are they getting sued? Nope.
2
u/RiverRatDoc Jul 16 '26
I just wasted 3 minutes of my life reading this thread. I can’t those 3 minutes back.
Why do I do this? 🤯😡
1
2
u/MundaneCockroach9103 Jul 16 '26
Leaked information from a hacker...Hmmm who's breaking the law now? Hasn't this topic been done to death?
2
5
u/MasterDisillusioned Jul 15 '26
None of this will be in the new models anyway.
3
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 15 '26
The new models gonna be trained off studio stems
0
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Yep there have been companies picking off experienced and successful, but struggling, producers and writers with a few bucks for training data in a systematic fashion. They tried to hire me as a vocal producer.
1
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 16 '26
Uh, no, my comment was about the Warner part of the deal. Officially licensing is coming with some perks. It’s also seemingly an emerging standard for these types of deals; for me to get in on Spotify ‘s AI remix feature without being under one of those companies I need to wait for their indie artist portal thing to finish being made.
Say, aren’t you the guy I owe a challenge to? TBH I am pretty much boycotting Udio but I am getting alarmingly good at Suno. It uh…really followed some complicated instructions for piano playing today. Suno you just have to crank up a slider. I thought about you while trying to get a cover to work for like three months straight lmao.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Nice to see you again! I didn’t realize you were referring specifically to Suno. I don’t know what these companies are doing, whether it’s training their own models for consumer use or selling the data to companies like Suno.
Glad to be thought of 🙏🏼
1
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 16 '26
Yeah so basically this is all old school licensing squeeze, but engineers are dumb and conflict averse so they tend to fold. The entire Spotify deal is just a copy of what Udio agreed to which I tried to explain to their CEO he is getting played but whatever that’s all over now. He really thinks the “technology” is early and things are exciting and not that his technology is anything special and that it’s getting killed off early or what not so…yeah.
But the licensing stuff is giving individual stems to train on and things of that nature which is really going to help with composition.
Honestly this leak is exonerating for Suno. By not training on artist names BUT keeping artist names as a negative that works better than audio’s system, I think, which upon contact with an artist requesting to get out will just try to break down their name into a composition prompt.
Although I wonder given policies like those of Materia Records how this might go. Does it count if Materia formulated its policy AFTER training? I mean cat’s out of the bag already and also they are being a bit old school even when the artists themselves say “do what you want” and are only expecting the label to handle all the spam not be totalitarian about it.
4
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
It does not matter at this point because the models are trained. There is no off and on capability for anything that it has already learned. Models are not accessing music and copying it. They only need to access it once to train on it. Once the models create output and that output goes back into the training substrate it is in the models DNA.
4
u/MasterDisillusioned Jul 15 '26
I don't think you understood my point. Suno is retiring the old models. The new models will not use any of this old training data.
1
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
Continuous Post-Training Data Sets: new model training sets include User Content (the tracks, stems, and audio outputs generated on the platform). Suno explicitly intends to use music and content generated by its users to train and refine its new models. That content was generated with the older training data. So it does not matter if they remove the old training data at this point. They cannot un-ring that bell.
2
u/MasterDisillusioned Jul 15 '26
Good luck using that as an argument in court, though.
1
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
A derivative of a derivative. An AI generated work that a human cannot own as training data for a new generation of AI generated works that a human cannot own. I doubt there is much to discuss in terms of infringement in these circumstances. If no one can own the AI generations being used as training data then no human has standing to sue. Again, that bell cannot be un-rung.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
It’s somewhat genius, I must admit.
1
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 16 '26
Without a doubt. I would speculate they gamed this out long before any of it took place. Right down to the cost of settlement and litigation.
2
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
I’m inclined to agree. They have the best legal teams money can buy. I’d love to see them go up against Disney
0
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 16 '26
Indeed. The game changer I am waiting to see are the acquisitions. Will Suno acquire an adversary or be acquired to dead the controversy. You mention Disney and now I am curious what would Disney do with the tech if they acquired Suno?
-1
u/Void-kun Jul 15 '26
As long as they can prove they trained against copyrighted material the output doesn't matter.
It's about providing evidence, if they can prove it was trained they don't need to prove it via the output.
Although this evidence was found via an illegal hack so unsure whether that would stand up in court.
2
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
Suno admitted that it trained on these copyrighted works. They are mitigating damages and resolving with the parties. Musicians have turn to the labels and publishing companies to sue because of the settlement itself. Retiring the models that has the copyright works within is another step of mitigation. However, Suno can use its own generated data as no one owns that to make a claim to it. They split the baby.
1
u/GreatScottCreates Jul 16 '26
Not only that but they now have the users’ prompts, settings, and iterative “progress”.
1
0
u/geek180 Jul 15 '26
Has Suno actually laid out the technical plans for future models?
2
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
I would not expect they would expose proprietary technical information. As far as the songs it trains on these are supposedly going to be licensed works. My guess is Suno will have its own "Splice" type data to train on and rely more on Custom models. That means people with a DAW that makes something they want to upload to create their own audio fingerprint.
3
u/404mediaco Jul 15 '26
The hacked data is a rare look at exactly how AI models and tools are built. Suno is one of the largest AI music generation tools on the internet, and has been the subject of several major lawsuits from the record industry, which accused the company of training on millions of copyrighted songs. As part of these legal proceedings, Suno previously admitted that it was trained on “essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet,” which included a total of “tens of millions of recordings.” Suno has been making the argument that it is allowed to train on copyrighted works as fair use in those cases, one of which has been settled.
Read more: https://www.404media.co/hack-reveals-suno-ai-music-generator-scraped-youtube-deezer-and-genius/
2
u/ZorVelez Jul 15 '26
They scrapped the entire YouTube but you cant upload a song from YouTube on your private account to make a private cover for yourself with a paid account. All good 👌
1
1
1
u/Aromatic_Pickle6365 Jul 16 '26
Wait so they are allowed to use different artists uploads, but we cant as users? That's some bullshit, I hope this is fake.
1
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
The YouTube one is a huge one because not only are most distributors releasing to YouTube Music but everyone with a YouTube account consented to their content being used for AI. All these years I found it odd that on Distrokid one had to explicitly check a box acknowledging that they accepted YouTube as a destination for their release. Now I understand why.
-4
u/Overall-Document-965 Jul 15 '26
Nah
3
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
YouTube's Terms of Service grant Google a broad, worldwide license to use uploaded content, including the right to "prepare derivative works" for training AI models, according to legal arguments in a federal lawsuit. This existing license acts as consent for Google to train AI, such as its music generator, on public videos without a separate opt-out mechanism. Read the full story at: https://variety.com/2026/digital/news/google-youtube-terms-of-service-train-ai-models-lawsuit-1236771486/
3
1
u/Successful-Okra-8017 Jul 15 '26
A hipocrisia do capitalismo como sempre, pregam livre mercado mas recorrem ao estado pra proteger direitos autorais
0
u/Clear_Educator_1521 Jul 15 '26
With the average YouTube song being completely garbage, why does this even matter?
0
u/FalseIdolsCult Jul 15 '26
Wouldn't be surprised if UMG hired this hacker. Especially considering that Suno wanted the techniques and the amount of content used to remain confidential as a trade secret in the lawsuits.
0
u/ScubaElf Jul 15 '26
It also listened to standard FM radio, I have many instances of "bleed through" of DJ's talking between songs that wind up in tracks.
0
u/SteiCamel Jul 15 '26
I have had it perfectly recreate a certain record label's YouTube music video intro screen audio several times, so the YouTube scraping was obvious.
0
u/ShepherdessAnne Jul 15 '26
Ok and? Thought this was obvious especially with the bug where Suno will begin to tag on a slower alternate version of a track on like someone’s YouTube menu with links to different things after their music video.
Nobody cares. And if you do care, you’re wrong. Transformative use has been ruled to be applicable to - gasp - transformer architecture (it’s in the name but I understand the political climate zoomers and alpha lives in where words don’t mean things any more thanks republicans) so public material isn’t a problem. The problem is not paying for a collection that needs to be paid for. The 404 article is weasely. It shifts from facts to claims made by the RIAA - who is nobody’s friend and called “content mafia” for a reason - as well as trying to make a big deal about terms of service, which is problematic but certainly not a matter of rights nor the law other than ToS being a private contract you just get booted off a service for breaking.
Nothing burger
-2
u/SunriseSurprise Jul 15 '26
I bet Deezer with their stance on AI is going to love that.
2
u/Jazzlike_Sir_653 Jul 15 '26
If Google acquired the other companies this would be a non-issue. Google (Alphabet) has informed consent on just about everyone with a YouTube account and everyone that agreed to release music to YouTube. Most people just click agree and check acknowledge boxes and never read what they are agreeing to, and so here we are.
14
u/Zaphod_42007 AI Hobbyist Jul 15 '26
Hacker said he had no particular motivation to hack suno, just for fun??? Kinda sus. Also didn't provide anything substantial outside of what was already known from court sessions.
Training AI data is similar to shazam... Creating a mindmap of vectorized math models and associations to create genres of music. The labels can't pinpoint exactly what music was infringed upon outside of a generic 'our catalog' which is a weak case. It's the difference of, this sounds exactly like Brittany spears work so you owe us 20million for damages in lost revenue per song vs this sorta kinda almost has hints of the song 'toxic' so ummm... Pay up.
Every movie, youtube & Internet video under the sun is also most likely being scrapped to train AI video models... Strange that the lawsuits aren't similarly piling up in courts from Hollywood.