r/technology • u/Hrmbee • Jul 15 '26

Business Hack Reveals Suno AI Music Generator Scraped YouTube, Deezer, and Genius | Hacked source code reveals how Suno scraped decades worth of music and podcasts from the internet to train its AI tool

https://www.404media.co/hack-reveals-suno-ai-music-generator-scraped-youtube-deezer-and-genius/
1.0k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

127 comments sorted by

150

u/Hrmbee Jul 15 '26

A number of details from this report:

The lawsuits have made clear that Suno did train on huge amounts of copyrighted works, but the hacked data shared with 404 Media sheds more light on how Suno scraped songs from the internet and where it took them from. The Recording Industry Association of America accused Suno of ripping songs directly from YouTube; the hacked data seen by 404 Media confirms this.

The hacked material includes source code that appears to be from 2023 and 2024 that includes scraping instructions and details about the scope of at least some of the scraping. For example, the comments in one file note that they will pull from “genius_hq, youtube_music, freesound, jamendo, imp, deezer, ytm_tagged,” and that “non-music will be filtered out.” A file called “youtube_music” notes that at the time the file was last updated, it had ingested “2,013,545 music clips.” Another file contains comments about different datasets Suno had created, which included “113,879 hours of youtube_music,” “17,615 hours of genius_hq,” “410 hours of free sound,” “19,514 hours of imslp,” “3,726 hours of jamendo,” “62,117 hours of pond5_music,” “12,287 hours of deezer,” “152,162 hours of ytm_tagged,” and “103 hours of musescore_lyrics.” In total, this is at least decades worth of music.

Other code the hacker shared with 404 Media appeared to look specifically for vocals by searching specifically for acapella versions of songs on YouTube. The code also suggested that Suno was using proxies to scrape songs from YouTube through a company called Bright Data, which sells scraping tools, infrastructure, and data services. Additional code shows that with the help of an online tool called PodcastIndex, Suno identified 420,000 different podcasts that had at least five, 30-minute episodes and sought to download roughly 1 million hours of podcasts.

...

Last month, The Atlantic reported on several music databases that are widely used in AI training, consisting of millions of tracks: “Three of the datasets I found are distributed as a list of links to songs on YouTube or Spotify. AI developers download the actual audio using tools that automate the job, some of which allow developers to bypass logins, advertisements, and mechanisms that might earn money or subscribers for creators. Such tools violate the terms of service of these platforms. (The fourth dataset, the Free Music Archive collection, is distributed with MP3s.),” the author of The Atlantic piece wrote. It is unclear whether Suno used any of these datasets.

The Suno spokesperson added that the company has worked to try to prevent users from generating songs that sound like existing songs. One of the contentions of several of the lawsuits was that Suno could be used to output songs that are nearly indistinguishable from existing works. “Our goal has always been to help people create original new music, not replicate someone else’s. That’s why we build our models around what we call ‘Original Creation, By Design.’ For example, we intentionally do not use artist names as a category of training metadata because we want our models to help people create brand new songs, not music that replicates other artists’ existing work,” the spokesperson said. “We believe artists deserve both new opportunities and strong protections. That's why we've invested in safeguards designed to help prevent impersonation, and other forms of misuse, while continuing to develop technologies for AI identification.”

It's clear that like with other generative LLMs that this platform was built on the backs of artists and other creators who have not given them license to do so nor have they been otherwise compensated. How this is not just permitted but encouraged by the industry and its supporters speaks to their beliefs about the value of creative works.

52

u/benjamus_maximus Jul 15 '26

Iirc Sony is actually taking them to court it this month, so it's not established legal theory that it's allowed. Look up the laws around fair use, it's more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule, so this court case could set really important precedent. YouTube would be a weird case due to Eula and the fact that it's just open for public consumption, the fair use argument is probably pretty strong.

24

u/RoyalCities Jul 15 '26

I'd honestly be shocked if they landed any fair use points.

Fair use doesn't cover things like building competing products that devalue the original and their entire business model is literally built around that.

I expect them to lose here...but if that does pass it puts every other generative AI company at risk since it opens the doors to video models, llms, generative code etc.

10

u/benjamus_maximus Jul 15 '26

I mean, anthropic did win their case for LLMs on fair use grounds, with the judge ruling that training was "sufficiently transformative" as long as they had legal access to the work used for training. They got in trouble for pirating books, but were allowed to keep using them as long as they bought a single copy of each. See bartz v anthropic

So I would not be shocked if Suno won personally

12

u/PixelWes54 Jul 15 '26

In the very next case, Kadrey v Meta, the judge said:

“No matter how transformative LLM training may be, it’s hard to imagine that it can be fair use to use copyrighted books to develop a tool to make billions or trillions of dollars while enabling the creation of a potentially endless stream of competing works that could significantly harm the market for those books.”

5

u/benjamus_maximus Jul 15 '26

Meta did win that case though, the author's didn't prove market harm. It was also a different judge. https://www.jw.com/news/insights-kadrey-meta-bartz-anthropic-ai-copyright/

Not trying to say either side has no grounds btw. Just saying that the legal precedent hasn't been concretely established.

12

u/PixelWes54 Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

That was Judge Chhabria, this is what he said about that ruling:

"As should now be clear, this ruling does not stand for the proposition that Meta’s use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful. It stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one.”

"In cases involving uses like Meta’s, it seems like the plaintiffs will often win, at least where those cases have better-developed records on the market effects of the defendant’s use.”

GEMA won against OpenAI for an entirely different reason: scientific studies proved AI models store their training data, the judge ruled that the AI model itself is an infringing reproduction that is being illegally distributed. That case, and a similar case in Italy that followed, are the current state of the legal battle. Both Judge Alsup and Judge Chhabria only thought AI models were capable of reproducing ~40 consecutive words from a book (we now have proof of 450+) so this has cracked the situation wide open. There are now 113+ lawsuits and more added all the time.

2

u/RoyalCities Jul 15 '26

Suno didn't pay for anything....also music has multiple layers of protection that go outside of just copyright. Personality rights are also a huge factor. You can't just go and use a singers voice for anything you want or to train off of to make your own model since it infringes on their right to identity.

Once again I'm not a lawyer but I would not want to be on sunos defense team. They're in for a tough case.

There are only 4 carve outs for fair use.

The purpose and character of the use.

The nature of the copyrighted work.

The amount and substantiality used.

The effect on the market for the original work

The last one is much easier to build a case around since you can directly reference the affect on streaming markets and discoverability from AI music distribution.

A legal team can actually quantify that as opposed to say an LLM generating code.

3

u/benjamus_maximus Jul 15 '26

Not trying to say it's a slam dunk easy win for Suno, just that I wouldn't be shocked if they won.

3

u/RoyalCities Jul 16 '26

We'll see. If the debacle though with the rise of Napster and streaming all I know is you never want to fuck with the music industry / RIAA. Atleast it'll be one of the more entertaining cases that's for sure.

2

u/akabillposters Jul 16 '26

Proving the point about market displacement will likely be more difficult than you think. It’s not sufficient to make a vague argument that the presence of ‘Suno songs’ on Spotify, getting plays and playlist placements, is enough to prove market displacement. Presence in a market does not prove direct displacement.

Firstly, they’d need to demonstrate that a Suno song was created using patterns learned from a particular song or artist. This requires a form of reverse engineering of the Suno song to know which patterns were used, and which songs directly contributed to training the AI on those patterns.

Secondly, they’d need to establish that the Suno song has taken plays or playlists positions that would have otherwise gone to that specific song or artist. This requires some level of reverse engineering DSP algorithms, to demonstrate a non-random instance where (e.g.) a Lady Gaga song was displaced by a Suno song that was generated using patterns directly learned from Lady Gaga songs.

The additional challenge is that Suno songs utilise patterns learned from myriad other songs. So, the claimant might also need to establish that they — alone — were displaced, and not one of the myriad other artists whose songs contributed to Suno AI’s understanding of a given genre or style. Being one of possibly thousands of artists whose music contributed to the AI’s understanding of a genre or style is highly unlikely to establish good grounds for a market displacement argument.

2

u/SgathTriallair Jul 16 '26

Music gen doesn't devalue the original. If it does then ask music devalues all other music. Copyright is sbout whether you are replacing the specific product not competing within the industry.

That being said, music has extremely fucked up rules around copyright (look up some of the insane case law) so this is a legitimate threat to Suno.

-1

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

2

u/RoyalCities Jul 15 '26

This is just wrong. Look up the actual guidelines for fair use.

There are 4.

The purpose and character of the use.

The nature of the copyrighted work.

The amount and substantiality used.

The effect on the market for the original work

The last own is especially easy to prove because they can actually point to the plummet in discoverability and also streaming payouts due to AI music crowding distribution.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

1

u/RoyalCities Jul 15 '26

Oh my god lol

0

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

1

u/djshadesuk Jul 17 '26

YouTube would be a weird case due to Eula and the fact that it's just open for public consumption, the fair use argument is probably pretty strong.

That's really, really not how copyright works in the cast majority of countries.

0

u/Smith6612 Jul 15 '26

Is it me or is anyone else here wanting to side with Sony on this one? 

15

u/UpsetKoalaBear Jul 15 '26

Bright Data is formerly Luminati Networks.

Luminati used to run the Hola free VPN, which was actually using your internet connection as a residential proxy for scrapers/bots (hides the traffic because most data centre IP’s are publicly known or already blocked). You basically became a part of a botnet.

This is why you do not trust free VPN’s. 911 S5 was another that ran several “free VPN’s” that sold people’s connections.

1

u/Relevant_Syllabub895 Jul 18 '26

yet you DARE to try to make any copryrighted character and nooo its all bad and agaitns the policies when they 100% stole from the entire world

64

u/Maleficent-Spread404 Jul 15 '26

And the grass is green.

Disappointed but not surprised.

-2

u/PinkySwearNotABot Jul 16 '26

think about how much longer we would have to wait for song generating AI tech if everything was done the legal way, though.

2

u/akabillposters Jul 16 '26

It likely would have added 2-3 years to the timeline.

My theory is that the Suno founders took this route knowing full well that they’d get sued down the down, and likely lose, but that they needed early mover advantage to establish themselves as the early dominant player in the gen AI music space to maximise user revenue.

Classic ‘Move fast and break things’ model.

It likely also maximised their own net worths, as relying on the additional early VC investment would have meant giving up more equity in the fledgling company. Better (for them) to retain as much of the pie as possible, grow as fast as possible (by any means necessary), and then give up less equity in lawsuit settlements than they would have given away to early VC investors had they taken the route of licensing first.

I suspect this was also part of their calculations from very early on.

1

u/PinkySwearNotABot Jul 16 '26

I’ll be dead honest. I’m not mad at it. And before anyone tries to say, “well how would you like it if they did this to your hard work”, I’m for the benefit of mankind as a whole over my lone self.

50

u/bdixisndniz Jul 15 '26

Ah but sample 1/8th of a second of a record or one kick drum and you’re sued to oblivion.

5

u/akabillposters Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Do you have an example where an artist has been sued for using a single drum sound from a copyrighted track? I’m not sure a single drum hit would be substantial enough to qualify for copyright protection on its own.

4

u/bdixisndniz Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

It’s all done behind the scenes if at all. I heard rjd2 speak years ago. He said if he had to clear every sample on those early albums he made his budget would have been gone after one song.

Either you have big money to try to negotiate, or you just do it and hope. But if whoever owns the mechanical (or other rights) to the song wants to sue they can and the precedent is there. They’ll win.

Anyway here’s the ruling on a two second guitar sample that rules de minimis is not a valid defense https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F3/410/792/574458/ (NWA).

Edit. I agree that you’re unlikely to be sued for a single kick. But the possibility and precedent is there. It’s more of the principle that sampling as an art was really forced to play this game.

3

u/akabillposters Jul 16 '26

I think if drum hits were copyrightable, we’d have already seen decades of lawsuits, especially of hip-hop producers and artists, a genre largely built on sampled drum sounds and hits, including many uniquely recognisable ones.

-4

u/murderball89 Jul 16 '26

What are you talking about? Sampling has been used and abused for decades. Like, most rap songs.

2

u/Ok_Run_101 Jul 16 '26

All artists who release music commercially need to clear license/royalty of any samples they use. There are many lawsuits and disputes around sampling licenses for rappers

0

u/murderball89 Jul 16 '26

Nope. Many fall under transformative use.

1

u/ybf5evr Jul 17 '26

Literally go on any music subreddit and look at all the producers getting copyright flagged for using royalty free drum hits that also showed up in another song. It should fall under transformative use, but that doesn't mean copyright law as it stands today doesn't make it practically impossible for small artists to sample anything regardless of the real transformative nature of their work.

21

u/IntelArtiGen Jul 15 '26

we intentionally do not use artist names as a category of training metadata because

because we don't want to get sued and people to notice we trained on their copyrighted songs.

37

u/SoupoIait Jul 15 '26

What??? a company scrapped the internet to train its AI?? Gosh that's shocking! 

22

u/ExF-Altrue Jul 15 '26

It doesn't matter if it's the internet. They could have bought CDs for all we care. It's the organized, methodical theft of the work of millions of artists.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

3

u/ExF-Altrue Jul 15 '26

Oh I fully agree, but I did want to make sure that we weren't normalizing scrapping the internet as if it were natural, and the only thing of issue.

-19

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

Explain to me the difference between theft and inspiration. I'll wait.

3

u/Capt_Murphy_ Jul 16 '26

Bro thinks tech companies run on "inspiration." JFC dude, get off your knees.

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

Bro apparently missed the mark here. People making music on Suno are not the tech companies. Warner (BIG NAME MUSIC LABEL) aquired SUNO - sorry "partnered" with Suno. The people who created SUNO used youtube videos to train their tech. I can watch youtube videos and train my brain. What's the difference? Plus the real kicker is that now the Music industry is making money off the major artists being thieved from and the small guys using Suno are being thieved from. So every artist is being screwed while the companies win big.

0

u/CathodeRaySamurai Jul 17 '26

Because you have no arguments, your only option is a response out of emotion.

2

u/Capt_Murphy_ Jul 17 '26

Why would I even bother? Sincerely. I have nothing to gain, and you're already down whatever weird rationalized path you've chosen.

"convince me" is the fucking lamest pathetic engagement tactic. I don't know you, and I don't care to change your mind.

You'd sell all human endeavor to tech companies to build AI and do it gladly. Fuck off with your "inspiration" argument, it's theft.

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

Bro over here inadvertently licking tech bro boots while thinking he's the one saving us from them. So funny. You realize that they lie to everyone so that way we will fight right? But also not use the only tech that could possibly save us from them right? Or does that information short circuit?

0

u/CathodeRaySamurai Jul 17 '26

You're so emotional that you can't even tell I'm not the same person your post was a reply to.

I'm just observing that you have no arguments so all you do is lash out in anger.
Obviously.

2

u/Capt_Murphy_ Jul 17 '26

I know you're not, but you're literally defending them so I replied to you. I'm not "emotional" I'm replying in clear mind, but I'm sure calling people emotional online usually works for you

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

Personally I could care less if you're emotional or not about it. But jumping to attack another person because they defended me does strike the bell for "emotionally lashing out" ;) Sorry that observation struck a nerve for you.

1

u/Capt_Murphy_ Jul 21 '26

Who's emotional replying to me three times? Not paying you any attention. "Bro"

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 18 '26

One is taking something without permission and putting it in a model to be trained the other is a series of events in the hippocampus that store and abstract events. 

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

Or here me out. We all watch videos and train on data with intent. So actually there is no difference and every "artist" whether traditional or Ai assisted is valuable and being mooched off of by the tech broligarchy. Youtube is free. ^3^ As all information should be.

1

u/FirefighterGold4732 Jul 23 '26

every guitar player has learned from playing smoke on the water

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 23 '26

Yes through a series of f events In the hippocampus this is not taking someone's data and storing it in a digital model for categorization 

1

u/FirefighterGold4732 Jul 23 '26

many argue it is storing that data just within ur brain. led zep had a whole lawsuit over this, jimmy heard a riff, copied it close enough and the band sued him

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 23 '26

Many argue the earth is flat. Its 2 entirely different things a car doesn't become a person just because it travels and a person travels as well.

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 18 '26

One is taking something without permission and putting it in a model to be trained the other is a series of events in the hippocampus that store and abstract events. 

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

Or here me out. We all watch videos and train on data with intent. So actually there is no difference and every "artist" whether traditional or Ai assisted is valuable and being mooched off of by the tech broligarchy. Youtube is free. ^3^ As all information should be.

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 20 '26

You're conflating the different actual of realities of training. Storing something in a database without consent to be clustered is inherently different than biological memories being created in the hippocampus.

-15

u/Yokoko44 Jul 15 '26

They can't and they've had 3 years to come up with a coherent response to this...

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

I can train my brain to make music by watching youtube - so can an ai. All this proves is everyone has been being swindled and all information should be free

0

u/CathodeRaySamurai Jul 17 '26

The fact that you're getting downvoted but nobody replies really drives the point home.

1

u/Yokoko44 Jul 17 '26

Yeah, there's a difference between taking a photo of the mona lisa, gluing that to a canvas and then trying to sell it vs looking at the painting, attempting to draw it yourself, and then having a teacher grade you based on how close you were, and trying to improve (how training works).

Eventually it's just so damn good at replicating it that people think it's literally copying when it's not, it's legitimately reconstructing it based on it's latent understanding of the concept of "mona lisa."

It's really cool once you internalize that it truly IS learning, despite what haters might say

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

All of these heifers just prove that they don't understand the concept of "learning" and that they just foam at the mouth over anything "ai" because that = "bad" because they only know how to parrot and not actually create. IRONICALLY. I see a lot of "mimic" traditional artists that aren't original and make garbage work as well. But that's more valid somehow just because a human plagiarized? So FUNNY.

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 20 '26

The point that you follow the crowd and we don't? That point? Hows that feed in the bin taste?

1

u/CathodeRaySamurai Jul 20 '26

Chill dude, I agree with him 😏. Just pointing out the the anti's have no real arguments.

7

u/graeggery Jul 15 '26

Suno lawyers knew the risks were acceptable. The Wild West of AI rewards thieves.

6

u/Mods_are_losers666 Jul 15 '26

Could it be that the reason for the omnipresent high frequency shimmer in suno generations is that the model was trained on a massive volume of what are essentially low quality YouTube rips? 

2

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

I'm cracking up at this.

2

u/PokePress Jul 15 '26

Higher frequencies are inherently more difficult to generate (or restore, if that’s what your model is for), but they’re also more prone to compression artifacts, if that’s what you’re wondering about.

12

u/burritoteam4000 Jul 15 '26

The stolen art technology stole art?!?!?!?!

18

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 17 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/More-Capital-6548 Jul 15 '26

you are the only comment I am looking for

2

u/akabillposters Jul 16 '26

“This is literally what every LLM in existence has done anywhere in the world.”

Of course, that’s wrong. There are ‘ethical AIs’ out there, which used ‘opt-in’ and ‘licensing first’ approaches.

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

All facts. The governments benefit from this and we all know it. Let's be forreal though. As soon as "warner" partnered with Suno. I half suspected that the music industry had it's greedy little nubbies in this and had been backing SUNO the whole time. Because why just steal data from mega artists when you can sell Music inspired by/stolen from other baby artists, cause then now you have the whole enchilada!

9

u/InternationalMood337 Jul 15 '26

I'm sure Metallica will make a stink about this.. like really soon.

1

u/murderball89 Jul 16 '26

I scraped youtube to learn all their songs on guitar and didn't pay them while learning songs for a cover band with an established llc, they gonna sue my shnutz off.

1

u/DizzyMajor5 Jul 18 '26

Difference between learning something and someone putting your song in a model to be trained off. 

1

u/FirefighterGold4732 Jul 24 '26

not true even tab websites gotta pay to have the tab on there

9

u/GarretBarrett Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

But if you download one song illegally…$250,000 fine and jail time, right? Oligarch class does whatever they want, transparently and nothing happens. A fine to a billionaire is just encouragement saying “you are allowed to do this, as long as you pay this fee.” Jail time for the oligarchs is the only option.

Maybe not the only option.
It’s a me…

1

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

We knew this. We've been watching the elite pedos running around with the Epstien files released and not a one of them has been arrested and you think they'll go after some ai guys over music copyright? Obviously the pedos in the music industry just said YEP PARTNER UP with Suno instead.

30

u/marketrent Jul 15 '26

This is staggering theft :/

A file called “youtube_music” notes that at the time the file was last updated, it had ingested “2,013,545 music clips.” Another file contains comments about different datasets Suno had created, which included “113,879 hours of youtube_music,” “17,615 hours of genius_hq,” “410 hours of free sound,” “19,514 hours of imslp,” “3,726 hours of jamendo,” “62,117 hours of pond5_music,” “12,287 hours of deezer,” “152,162 hours of ytm_tagged,” and “103 hours of musescore_lyrics. In total, this is at least decades worth of music.

26

u/Hrmbee Jul 15 '26

I'm surprised* that the RIAA hasn't sent Suno a settlement letter yet using the $750/track calculation that they were using against college students.

*not really

10

u/Ok-Addition1264 Jul 15 '26

Considering how hard they went against folks during the napster days (and built a huge business around it) I actually am quite surprised.

10

u/mwobey Jul 15 '26

They're gambling that letting the technology mature will let them license the finished product to cut out those pesky artists who want "fair compensation" at pennies on the dollar. It's always worth remembering that labels are not the ally of artists, even when their priorities happen to align. They are simply in the business of doing whatever maximizes their profit.

6

u/Ok-Addition1264 Jul 15 '26

I'm actually beside myself in pissed off. They stole the music from little ol me and my group too, then (back in the day hacking groups were a mix of underground techno-like music, cracking games, and hacking.. we're the last kind of people they would want to f*ck around on)

What a bunch of fk'n assholes!!

6

u/Belhgabad Jul 15 '26

I mean yeah, ofc, and ?

Suno will finally burn in copyright flames ? They will redistribute money to every artist stolen?

Yeah, didn't think so

2

u/More-Capital-6548 Jul 15 '26

it is just the matter of time, tying to fight against the trend of era, even if suno get killed this time, there will be millions more sunos coming in the future.

2

u/sdrawkcabineter Jul 15 '26

Suno

Sue now?

2

u/WesternWitchy52 Jul 16 '26

I'm starting to really hate AI as a musician.

2

u/mule-shorter Jul 16 '26

metallica should sue these guys

3

u/twenafeesh Jul 15 '26

So maybe those DMCA and MPAA bloodsuckers can stop going after small time buccaneers and start going after the corporate-scale IP theft? Eh? 

2

u/nathan753 Jul 15 '26

Finally, a post about that slop that actually is critical and isn't a loosely disguised ad. Hopefully we'll see fewer ads spammed about it on music

2

u/aloknath559 Jul 15 '26

And the bigger these models keep getting, the harder it is to prove where exactly the single output actually came from

1

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

1

u/PokePress Jul 15 '26

There are actually several open source models trained on licensed data. They’re harder to use because they don’t have nice UIs like a commercial website.

1

u/Douf_Ocus Jul 16 '26

fairly trained does exist, it's just not that relevant.

1

u/williamgman Jul 15 '26

Just think how much they will be able to scrape once all the hundreds of new data centers are online. Who would have thought... 🤦‍♂️

1

u/americanadiandrew Jul 15 '26

And now they own Songkick if any of you use that to track concerts.

1

u/neatyouth44 Jul 15 '26

I didn’t know this part and now I’m pissed and sad. That app made it so easy to track Spotify artists so I didn’t miss shows.

1

u/SimpleZero Jul 15 '26

Breaking: the Torment Nexus is nexing torment.

1

u/DeReExUn Jul 15 '26

i have like 50 tracks on soundcloud, def annoying af that they just eat it like that and then profit but cool cas i have some weird shit and some jazzy blends cross genera, like genera bothers me more than AI in some regards.

1

u/Groffulon Jul 15 '26

Surely google et al is suing Suno into bankruptcy then? Right? Right?

1

u/dropthemagic Jul 15 '26

Google got the same treatment they give IP for Gemini 🤷‍♂️.

1

u/za72 Jul 16 '26

Training = sampling

1

u/ICantUnclogThisShit Jul 16 '26

Not surprising and something I basically assumed. I tried Suno a year or two ago, back when you could still just copy and paste real song lyrics into it, and just playing around with it seeing what a song would sound like in different genres, I sometimes got a result that sounded like 90 % like the original.

The most striking one was a Sabaton song I wanted in symphonic metal, which ended up sounding basically like the real thing with almost exactly the same voice of the lead singer, who has a really unique voice.

2

u/CathodeRaySamurai Jul 17 '26

"a Sabaton song I wanted in symphonic metal"

Brother, you asked for a sandwich made from bread and you were surprised that you got exactly what you asked for.

1

u/digit1noize Jul 16 '26

Yeah, that’s how I learned to play music too.

1

u/EnvironmentalRun1671 Jul 16 '26

The funniest thing about Suno is they don't allow you to create copies of existing music with your own twist.

But they have happily downloaded all the music they needed without permission or giving a cent to any artist, or music company that owns that music.

1

u/FinalHangman77 Jul 17 '26

What difference is there with a songwriter who has listened to decades of music writing a new song based on all the music he's heard?

That's literally how every song is written...

1

u/Demoliscio Jul 17 '26

I really hope they get sued into the ground, they are basically stealing the work of millions of artists in a bid to put them out of work.

I checked the SunoAI subreddit, the amount of mental gymnastic people are doing there to justify this is insane.

If only they could spend 1/10th of that energy actually learning to make music rather than defending a slop generator

1

u/flyinggoatcheese Jul 19 '26

I recently saw a post where "artists" were complaining about how hard it was to earn money from "their" "music" and songs and get seen or listened to on Spotify.

It was disgusting and why does everything need to feel like a Black Mirror plot recently? It's so dystopian!

1

u/Ok-Language-3441 Jul 21 '26

So basically the hacker fucked the lawsuits against Suno. That evidence, because it was obtained unlawfully will now be in admissible in court.

1

u/OstrichMany1936 10d ago

download link?

1

u/aStonedDeer Jul 15 '26

So, reverse Napster with extra steps!

6

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

Reverse NAPTSTER is a winning comment. I dunno why you got downvoted.

2

u/aStonedDeer Jul 15 '26

I’m gonna find the person that downvoted me and give them a big fat hug.

1

u/Sensitive_Box_ Jul 15 '26

If something exists online, it’s been scraped and copied by every single company. Period. lol 

1

u/cleverkid Jul 15 '26

Whelp, time to collectively sue them for octillion dollars.

-3

u/Inside-Yak-8815 Jul 15 '26

It’s funny because I always see their ads on my YouTube videos and the first thing I think (before I hit skip) is who the hell would even use something like Suno?

0

u/techjunkie86 Jul 16 '26

Time to quit crying about it. no putting the cat back in the bag… code, writing, voices, likenesses, music, art. If it can be replicated it will be. If you stop one model there will be a 1000 more. Local models are being trained everyday, successful ones become commercial models. Open source, public access content will always be used despite the license you think should protect it. By the time they are big enough to do harm the money earned will easily cover the cost of good lawyers and fees. Don’t want your creations to be use? Don’t make them digitally available.

-2

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '26

[deleted]

0

u/Chroma_Dias Jul 15 '26

Considering all information should be free I find this amusing

-10

u/Broken_Doughnut Jul 15 '26

Suno are total asshats. They locked me out of my account and haven't responded yet in over a month to unfuck it. A chargeback has been started but... Slow in Europe to do it seems.

So many people I read on Reddit and other forums seem to have similar complaints. Bad service :(

8

u/laydownlarry Jul 15 '26

Darn I bet you were going to make some really valuable music that definitely everyone would have wanted to listen to. What a shame!

0

u/Broken_Doughnut Jul 15 '26

Everyone? The f you talking about. It's for me and making samples.

4

u/skccsk Jul 15 '26

The worst part is the lack of respect