AI music generation startups Suno and Udio have mounted a legal challenge against a controversial 2022 ruling that effectively criminalized the practice of downloading videos from YouTube.
The companies filed an amicus brief urging the US Second Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn the decision, which they argue poses significant risks to the fair use doctrine by penalizing educators, filmmakers, and others who may have legitimate reasons to download content from the platform. The brief specifically contends that the court’s ruling incorrectly interpreted the DMCA by conflating access controls with copy controls.
The legal battle emerges amid escalating tensions between these AI startups and record labels aligned with the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). Major labels have accused Suno and Udio of obtaining thousands to millions of copyrighted audio tracks through “stream-ripping,” a practice they describe as circumvention of YouTube’s technological protections, including its rolling cipher and other anti-copy measures designed to prevent unauthorized downloading.
While Suno doesn’t deny downloading songs from YouTube, the company firmly contests that the practice violates the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Their defense hinges on the argument that using copyrighted music to train AI models falls within fair use protections under US copyright law, a position that directly challenges the record labels’ attempt to use stream-ripping allegations as a way to sidestep evolving fair use interpretations that might favor AI development. The case highlights the role that performance rights organizations play in managing royalties for public performances of copyrighted music across various platforms.
The 2022 verdict at the center of this dispute equated downloading YouTube videos with copyright infringement subject to statutory penalties, which Suno and Udio claim represents a fundamental legal error. Their challenge comes at a time when courts appear to be exercising caution in similar cases; a federal judge recently denied comparable infringement claims in a separate AI case due to procedural technicalities. This emerging legal framework could significantly impact how musicians develop sync deals for their original compositions, potentially restricting an increasingly important revenue stream. This case follows a previous lawsuit where Yout.com operator Johnathan Nader unsuccessfully challenged RIAA over similar stream-ripping allegations.
The core legal debate now centers on whether YouTube’s technological measures qualify as protected access controls under the DMCA, and whether Suno’s downloading activities trigger the anti-circumvention provisions outlined in the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 1201), potentially setting an important precedent for the intersection of AI development and copyright law.
