News

Universal and Sony Sue Suno Again Over 60,202 Songs After a Judge Forced Them Into a New Case

UMG Recordings, Sony Music Entertainment, and related labels filed a second federal copyright complaint (1:26-cv-14275) in Massachusetts on 18 September 2026, asserting 60,202 recordings left out of the June 2024 case. Statutory damages at $150,000 per work would run past $9 billion, and the claims are unproven.

Universal and Sony Sue Suno Again Over 60,202 Songs After a Judge Forced Them Into a New Case

The Next Web reported on 18 September 2026 that Universal and Sony have sued Suno a second time over 60,202 sound recordings that were not in the June 2024 case. The complaint landed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts as case 1:26-cv-14275.

This is a second federal copyright complaint by UMG Recordings, Sony Music Entertainment, and related label entities. It is not a final judgment, not a licensing deal, and not the same docket as Sony's second Udio suit or the German GEMA ruling. Warner is not a plaintiff here. Warner signed a licensing deal and the new papers describe it as a former plaintiff.

The labels first tried to amend the 2024 complaint to add about 61,000 more works. On 18 August the court denied that amendment without prejudice, saying a new filing would disturb the schedule, and pointed them to parallel proceedings. The new complaint says it is doing what the court contemplated.

The counts are direct infringement for post-1972 recordings and for pre-1972 recordings protected under the Music Modernization Act, plus a DMCA section 1201(a) circumvention claim that Suno stream-ripped YouTube audio. The labels ask for up to $150,000 per work for willful infringement, plus up to $2,500 for each act of circumvention. Across 60,202 recordings the statutory ceiling alone runs past $9 billion.

Suno has not yet answered the new complaint on the docket. Engadget (Ian Carlos Campbell, 18 September 2026) later carried a Suno statement calling the claims "fundamentally flawed on both the facts and the law" and saying v6 was trained on licensed partner content plus user interactions. The Hollywood Reporter (Ethan Millman) says the labels treat those user interactions, and any distillation from older models, as a way to keep using the unlicensed corpus. Those two stories do not agree on what v6 actually copied.

Related training-theft tape is already on Microsoft's internal "largest theft of labor" memos and the subscriber suit that calls AI lab coordination a cartel.

If you buy, train, or license generative music this week, treat the 60,202-work filing as a live second Massachusetts docket with a statutory ask past $9 billion, and do not treat a Warner-style license as closing Universal or Sony.

Subscribe to Techpresso

Free daily newsletter, read in 5 minutes.

Subscribe free