Amazon is blundering into an AI copyright nightmare
Suno was unexpectedly highlighted during Amazon's Alexa Plus presentation, drawing attention for its AI song generation capabilities. This demonstration, sandwiched between other announcements, piqued interest due to its unique features. Despite being initially downplayed, Suno's presence stood out and sparked curiosity among viewers. Amazon's inadvertent focus on Suno showcased its potential impact within the presentation.
The Copyright Battle Surrounding Suno AI Song Generator
Suno wasn’t supposed to be an important part of a presentation. The AI song generation platform was a minor demonstration of how Alexa Plus could integrate into other apps, sandwiched between other announcements. But it caught my attention all the same — because whether Amazon realized it or not, the company blundered into a massive copyright fight.
Suno, for those of you not familiar, is an AI song generator: enter a text prompt and a song comes back. Like many generative AI companies, it is also being sued by all and sundry for ingesting copyrighted material.
The parties in the suit don’t have a smoking gun, since they can’t directly peek at Suno’s training data. But they have managed to generate some suspiciously similar-sounding AI generated materials, mimicking songs from renowned artists. Suno essentially admits these songs were regurgitated from copyrighted source material, but it says such use was legal.
Legal Implications and Amazon's Integration
Whether AI training data constitutes fair use is a common but unsettled legal argument, and the plaintiffs contend Suno still amounts to “pervasive illegal copying” of artists’ works.
Amazon’s Suno integration requires a Suno account to be linked to Alexa. Suno is meant to be hyper-personalized music, letting anyone generate a song. With the Suno demo, Amazon risks antagonizing the very players that make this possible, while simultaneously undercutting Suno’s legal case.
Amazon declined to provide an on-the-record comment about the Suno demonstration. The key question in a fair use lawsuit — including the RIAA’s suit against Suno — is whether a derivative work is intended to replace the original thing.
Concerns and Ramifications
Every minute spent listening to Suno’s AI-generated music is one spent not listening to original artists' songs through other platforms like Spotify or Amazon Music Unlimited — and the original artists get affected as well.
If “Suno is suddenly available to every Alexa subscriber, that would be of great concern,” says Richard James Burgess, the president and CEO of the American Association of Independent Music. Burgess emphasized that the problem is the alleged copyright violations, not AI-generated music as a whole.
Suno, like a lot of other AI companies, offers subscriptions that allow users to generate songs. If the company is found to have infringed on copyright, the damages for the songs it’s already used will be sky-high, on top of any other licensing fees Suno will have to pay.
Impact on the Music Industry and HONESTAI ANALYSIS
I’m not convinced Suno understands why people care about music or what the point is. Music, like all worthwhile art, is about people. The AI songs that have broken through to public consciousness have involved a musician working with the AI as a tool to curate and edit it, unlike the raw prompt generation shown in the Suno demo.
An Alexa speaker is not a tool for editing or playing with generative music. Amazon's involvement in this copyright battle raises questions about its commitment to protecting against fraud and misattribution in the music industry. The potential ramifications of AI-generated music on original artists and the music industry as a whole remain to be seen.