Are you an independent musician and/or producer who published music via streaming platforms since 2021? AI music generation company Udio may have misappropriated your music to train its models, without consent. Contact us »
WHAT’S THE ISSUE?
Hagens Berman’s legal team has joined forces with Delgado Entertainment Law PLLC to represent independent music artists whose copyrighted songs were allegedly copied without permission to train AI music-generation platform Udio. The lawsuits allege copyright infringement, circumvention of digital protection measures, and unfair competition arising from Udio’s unauthorized use of artists’ music, voices and identities. Udio is alleged to have misappropriated the content of singers, producers, performers and other creators without permission or payment, in what attorneys believe amounts to theft.
WHO IS AFFECTED BY THE CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST UDIO?
Currently, the lawsuit seeks to uphold the rights of all persons and entities who fit the following criteria:
- own or control copyrights in sound recordings and/or musical compositions that were made available on internet-based streaming services since Jan. 1, 2021, and
- whose works were copied, ingested or used by Udio to train, validate, fine-tune or operate its AI models without authorization.
Attorneys believe that thousands of musicians, producers and other creators have been harmed by Udio’s unauthorized and unpaid theft of their work. If your music was made available via online streaming platforms, attorneys urge you to contact our team to find out more about your potential rights.
WHAT DOES THE LAWSUIT ALLEGE ABOUT MUSIC STOLEN TO BUILD AI MODELS?
The lawsuit accuses Udio of blatant theft of the creations of thousands of independent music creators and producers. Rather than license these copyrighted songs like other AI companies have already done, the complaint alleges that Udio instead chose to steal the songs of music’s most vulnerable individuals.
“Udio accessed some of these songs by unlawfully ‘stream ripping’ them from the streaming platform YouTube,” the lawsuit states. “Udio circumvented the YouTube technological measures by trafficking in devices that are designed specifically to unlock protected media and gain access to the underlying audiovisual files contained in YouTube videos.” According to the complaint, once AI ingests music, those songs are stored in its neural network, and not capable of deletion or retraction.
WHAT SHOULD INDEPENDENT MUSIC ARTISTS KNOW ABOUT THE LAWSUIT?
The lawsuit alleges that independent artists who hold exclusive rights to their sound recordings and their underlying compositions have been trampled by the company’s artificial intelligence music generator.
While major labels are currently pursuing litigation against these entities, “Independent artists remain sidelined, unrepresented, and deprived of a meaningful remedy.”
The lawsuit states that Udio has openly admitted to training its model using “tens of millions” of “publicly available” sources, songs which are by majority owned and controlled by independent artists. The complaint alleges that Udio’s actions “…were not only unlawful, but an unconscionable attack on the music community’s most vulnerable and valuable creators.”
HOW DID UDIO ALLEGEDLY HARM ARTISTS?
The business model allegedly employed by Udio takes songs freely available on the Internet and repackages them into competing AI-generated songs. This theft therefore competes in the same marketplace with musicians whose works were stolen in the first place. These offenses have come at a great cost to independent artists.
Last year alone, Spotify reported paying ten billion dollars in music royalties to artists and rightsholders, a large portion of which belongs to independent artists, according to Spotify.
According to the lawsuits, unauthorized use undermines the existing streams of revenue, including licensing markets, for independent music, which the Copyright Office itself recognized in a draft report as valid and protectable under copyright law. Infringing AI-generated works also contain verbatim or near-verbatim excerpts of pre-existing songs, according to attorneys. This alleged exploitation robs independent artists of revenue.
HOW CAN A CLASS ACTION HELP ARTISTS WHOSE CREATIONS WERE ALLEGEDLY STOLEN TO BUILD AI?
A class-action lawsuit seeks to level the playing field, bringing strength to collective action to change unlawful practices, including those infringing on copyright and your rights as a creative. Though these measures do not provide immediate relief, they are a proven method of holding companies accountable for wrongdoing and allow many individuals to collectively stand up to powerful entities like Udio. Attorneys seek to represent creators’ rights under state and federal laws pertaining to copyright infringement, circumvention of digital protection measures, and related claims.
The lawsuit against Udio seeks both fair and proper damages to compensate artists who have been harmed by these alleged actions, as well as an injunction forcing an end to “massive and ongoing infringement” of artists’ rights.
TOP HIGH TECH LITIGATION LAW FIRM
Hagens Berman is one of the most successful consumer litigation law firms in the United States and has achieved more than $345 billion in settlements for clients and class members in lawsuits against Big Tech, automakers, major banks and other corporations.
The firm’s cases span cutting-edge litigation in various practice areas, including a lawsuit related to the use of AI to allegedly rig horse betting and a $22.7 billion settlement related to image and likeness rights of college athletes. The firm’s legal team has also represented the rights of an artist whose copyright was violated and work stolen, reaching a settlement that brought her quick and just resolution. Your claim will be handled by attorneys experienced in the areas of high-tech law and the potential harms of artificial intelligence.
Hagens Berman’s co-counsel, Delgado Entertainment Law PLLC, is a prominent entertainment and IP law firm, launched by attorney Krystle Delgado following her successful music career. Krystle knows firsthand the dedication and personal commitment that goes into artistic creation and brings this expertise to the clients she represents.
NO COST TO YOU
Class members will never be asked to pay attorney fees or legal costs. In the event Hagens Berman or any other firm obtains a settlement that provides benefits to class members, the court will determine a reasonable fee to be awarded to the class’s legal team.
CASE TIMELINE
Plaintiff’s Digital Millennium Copyright Act claim survives, and output-infringement claim dismissed with leave to amend. Plaintiff’s claim under state law was dismissed.
