Blab AI
Hawaii Musicians File Lawsuit Against AI Music Platforms Over Unlicensed Use of Their Songs
A group of Hawaiian recording artists has filed a class‑action suit against the AI‑generated music services Suno and Udio after discovering their tracks were listed in a database compiled by The Atlantic’s AI Watchdog. The plaintiffs allege that the platforms incorporated the artists’ works into their training data without permission, payment, or consent.
The case hinges on a list of nearly ten million tracks that the AI Watchdog database claims were harvested from the internet to train the models used by Suno and Udio. Among those entries are songs by Hawaii artists spanning several decades, including Israel Kamakawiwo’ole’s “White Sandy Beach,” newer releases by Anuhea and Kolohe Kai, and work by Na Hoku Hanohano‑award‑winning rapper Thomas Iannucci. Iannucci said he learned of his music’s presence in the database only days ago, describing the situation as “predatory” and “annoying.”
According to the complaint, both platforms have trained their generative models on copyrighted music without obtaining the necessary licenses. The plaintiffs argue that the use of the songs violates U.S. copyright law and that the companies have profited from the artists’ creative output without providing any compensation.
Suno, founded in Cambridge, Massachusetts, has been available since December 2023 and offers a web application that creates songs from text or audio prompts. Udio, launched in April 2024, similarly generates music based on user prompts and offers a free beta with paid subscription options. Both companies have faced class‑action suits alleging that they used copyrighted recordings to train their models.
The Atlantic’s AI Watchdog database was created to investigate the data practices of tech companies that produce AI‑generated music. The database lists the tracks that the platforms allegedly used, but it does not disclose the source of the data. The plaintiffs contend that the lack of transparency and the absence of licensing agreements constitute infringement.
Professional songwriter Chaz Umamoto, who has worked with many local artists, noted that Suno’s valuation of $5 billion makes the potential damages significant. He added that many artists in Hawaii struggled to survive during the pandemic and would not be able to defend themselves in a legal battle.
Hawaii entertainment lawyer Julia Brotman explained that the legal landscape is still uncertain. “Because it’s so complicated, a lot of people just don’t even touch it. A lot of those cases settle. Because of that, there’s actually not a ton of case law to make it really clear,” she said.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for the use of the artists’ works and an injunction to prevent further unauthorized use. It also calls for a broader discussion about how AI platforms should handle copyrighted material and whether new licensing frameworks are needed.
Both Iannucci and Umamoto are encouraging other artists to be cautious about using AI music generators. They argue that the intelligence behind the platforms is derived from data that the artists did not agree to share.
The parties to the lawsuit have not yet responded to requests for comment. Suno and Udio’s attorneys have been contacted by Hawaii News Now, and the publication is awaiting a reply.
The case is still in its early stages. The outcome could influence how AI music generators operate in the United States and may prompt changes in licensing practices for AI‑trained models. Until a resolution is reached, artists and developers alike will be watching the proceedings closely.
The case hinges on a list of nearly ten million tracks that the AI Watchdog database claims were harvested from the internet to train the models used by Suno and Udio. Among those entries are songs by Hawaii artists spanning several decades, including Israel Kamakawiwo’ole’s “White Sandy Beach,” newer releases by Anuhea and Kolohe Kai, and work by Na Hoku Hanohano‑award‑winning rapper Thomas Iannucci. Iannucci said he learned of his music’s presence in the database only days ago, describing the situation as “predatory” and “annoying.”
According to the complaint, both platforms have trained their generative models on copyrighted music without obtaining the necessary licenses. The plaintiffs argue that the use of the songs violates U.S. copyright law and that the companies have profited from the artists’ creative output without providing any compensation.
Suno, founded in Cambridge, Massachusetts, has been available since December 2023 and offers a web application that creates songs from text or audio prompts. Udio, launched in April 2024, similarly generates music based on user prompts and offers a free beta with paid subscription options. Both companies have faced class‑action suits alleging that they used copyrighted recordings to train their models.
The Atlantic’s AI Watchdog database was created to investigate the data practices of tech companies that produce AI‑generated music. The database lists the tracks that the platforms allegedly used, but it does not disclose the source of the data. The plaintiffs contend that the lack of transparency and the absence of licensing agreements constitute infringement.
Professional songwriter Chaz Umamoto, who has worked with many local artists, noted that Suno’s valuation of $5 billion makes the potential damages significant. He added that many artists in Hawaii struggled to survive during the pandemic and would not be able to defend themselves in a legal battle.
Hawaii entertainment lawyer Julia Brotman explained that the legal landscape is still uncertain. “Because it’s so complicated, a lot of people just don’t even touch it. A lot of those cases settle. Because of that, there’s actually not a ton of case law to make it really clear,” she said.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for the use of the artists’ works and an injunction to prevent further unauthorized use. It also calls for a broader discussion about how AI platforms should handle copyrighted material and whether new licensing frameworks are needed.
Both Iannucci and Umamoto are encouraging other artists to be cautious about using AI music generators. They argue that the intelligence behind the platforms is derived from data that the artists did not agree to share.
The parties to the lawsuit have not yet responded to requests for comment. Suno and Udio’s attorneys have been contacted by Hawaii News Now, and the publication is awaiting a reply.
The case is still in its early stages. The outcome could influence how AI music generators operate in the United States and may prompt changes in licensing practices for AI‑trained models. Until a resolution is reached, artists and developers alike will be watching the proceedings closely.
