Sony sues Udio again over copyright infringement

Sony sues Udio again over copyright infringement as Sony Music Entertainment has filed a second lawsuit in an ongoing legal dispute with the Udio platform. The second lawsuit follows an earlier suit that involved Sony, several of its subsidiaries, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group and was coordinated by the Recording Industry Association of America. The other two major record labels have settled their litigation and struck licensing deals with Udio, leaving Sony as the only major label without a deal. Sony’s complaint alleges that Udio copied copyrighted sound recordings without a license and describes that conduct as unlawful.

The new filing focuses on a set of 30,117 recordings that Sony previously tried to add to the first lawsuit. A judge struck down the motion to add those recordings on June 29. Sony says it selected the 30,117 recordings after discovery in the first suit allowed it to use audio fingerprinting software on Udio’s training data, and it describes the set as only a portion of material Udio used without permission. Some of the works within that set include recordings by Beyoncé, Britney Spears, Johnny Cash and Harry Styles.

The first lawsuit was filed against Udio by Sony Music Entertainment alongside several of its subsidiaries and included claims coordinated with Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group under the auspices of the Recording Industry Association of America. The litigation involving the other two major record labels resulted in settlements and licensing agreements with Udio, leaving Sony as the only major label without a licensing deal with the platform. A judicial ruling in the related proceedings stated that plaintiffs have the right to seek to stop infringement of, and recover damages for, all copyrighted works and that there is no requirement that such relief be sought in that single lawsuit.

Sony’s second lawsuit centers on a list of 30,117 recordings that Sony previously attempted to add to the initial case. A judge struck down the motion to include those 30,117 recordings on June 29. Sony says it identified the specific recordings after discovery in the first lawsuit permitted the use of audio fingerprinting software on Udio’s training data, and Sony characterizes the 30,117-item set as only a portion of material Udio used without permission. The set reportedly includes works by Beyoncé, Britney Spears, Johnny Cash and Harry Styles.

On June 29, a judge struck down the motion to add 30,117 recordings to the initial lawsuit against Udio. The judge’s written ruling stated that “Plaintiffs have the right to seek to stop infringement of, and recover damages for, all copyrighted works” and that “there is no requirement that it be done in [that] lawsuit.” The court’s order therefore denied the procedural request to append that particular set of recordings to the earlier case on that date. The ruling records the court’s view of the plaintiffs’ procedural options without expanding on the merits of the underlying infringement claims in that entry.

The ruling explicitly affirms that plaintiffs retain the right to seek injunctive relief to stop alleged infringement and the right to recover monetary damages for copyrighted works. The decision also states that those rights are not limited to being pursued within a single lawsuit, noting there is no requirement that all copyrighted works be pursued in the earlier filing. The document sets out those procedural conclusions as part of the court’s handling of the motion regarding the 30,117-item list. The available sources do not provide additional detail about the judge’s reasoning beyond these statements.

Sony’s complaint asserts that Udio copied copyrighted sound recordings without a license and characterises that conduct as unlawful. The filing sets out those allegations as the basis for its claims against the Udio platform and identifies a broader catalogue of works it says were used without permission. The complaint specifically names a set of recordings that Sony identifies for separate action and frames Udio’s later licensing activity as insufficient in light of the alleged prior copying. “Udio’s belated embrace of licensing only underscores the unlawfulness of its decision to copy Plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings, without a license, in the first place,” reads Sony’s complaint.

In its pleading, Sony states that it selected the particular set of recordings after discovery in the initial lawsuit permitted the use of audio fingerprinting software on Udio’s training data. Sony describes the identified 30,117-item list as only a portion of material it says Udio used without permission. The complaint thus links the discovery-enabled analysis to the identification of specific recordings for the separate filing. The available sources do not provide additional internal detail from Sony’s complaint beyond these assertions and the quoted language.

Notable artists whose works are identified in the litigation include Beyoncé, Britney Spears, Johnny Cash and Harry Styles, each listed among recordings Sony says were used without permission. The companies and organisations referenced in the case include Sony Music Entertainment and several of its subsidiaries, the Udio platform, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group, which were parties to the initial coordinated litigation. The Recording Industry Association of America is named as coordinating the earlier suit, and industry groups and services cited in the broader litigation context include Merlin, Kobalt and Believe. The National Music Publishers’ Association is also mentioned among relevant entities connected with the dispute. The available sources do not provide this information.

CONCLUSION

Sony Music Entertainment continues active litigation against the Udio platform, having filed a second lawsuit after the initial coordinated suit; Sony remains the only major label without a licensing deal with Udio, while the other two major record companies settled and struck licensing agreements with the platform. The second lawsuit concerns a list of 30,117 recordings that Sony previously sought to add to the first case, and a judge struck down the motion to include that set on June 29. Sony says it identified those recordings after discovery in the first lawsuit allowed it to use audio fingerprinting software on Udio’s training data, and Sony’s complaint alleges that Udio copied copyrighted sound recordings without a license. The litigation is ongoing.