Munich court rules against Suno in copyright case

On 31 July, the 42nd civil chamber of the Landgericht München I handed down a judgment that sets a demanding precedent for generative music models. In the case brought by GEMA — the German collecting society for authors' rights, the functional counterpart of Italy's SIAE — against Suno Inc., the US AI music generation company, the court held that training on protected works, carried out in the United States, together with the subsequent 'memorisation' and reproduction in Europe, constitutes copyright infringement. According to the court's reasoning, the generation of outputs substantially similar to originals such as 'Atemlos' or 'Daddy Cool' rules out coincidence, given how complex those songs are, and leaves the defence based on mere statistical learning without force.

The judgment dismantles two pillars of Suno's technical defence. First, the European text and data mining exception was found inapplicable to the reproduction of works in their entirety. How that exception should be read remains open, however: a referral in the Like Company case is pending before the Court of Justice of the EU. Second, liability does not fall on the user: prompted only with song titles and no melodic instructions, the system was able to reconstruct the original melodies. As Reed Smith's legal analysis points out, compliance with the AI Act is not an automatic defence against copyright infringement, and direct liability rests with the provider of the system.

As matters stand, the court granted the injunctive claims and declared the right to damages, though the amount remains undetermined and will be assessed separately. GEMA, which already won a favourable ruling against OpenAI in November 2025, now under appeal, is seeking a proportionate share of revenues. A Suno spokesperson disputed the decision, calling it a 'mischaracterisation' of the technology and of US law, and confirmed that an appeal is being considered. Although not final and still awaiting the full written reasons, the decision lands within the European regulatory framework just as further parts of the AI Act become applicable from 2 August 2026.

The distinction between a model that 'learns' and one that 'memorises' is the point on which the court decided, and so far no European judge has set out a technical criterion for telling them apart. Nor is it clear what practical effect the injunction will have on Suno's operations in Germany.

— Olya