German court rules Suno illegally trained AI on GEMA songs, orders damages in landmark copyright case

The court's ruling

The Munich Regional Court ruled on Friday, 31 July 2026, that Suno, a Massachusetts-based AI music generator, violated copyright by training its model on six songs administered by the German performing rights society GEMA. The specific works are 'Atemlos' (recorded by Helene Fischer), 'Daddy Cool' and 'Rasputin' (Boney M.), 'Big in Japan' and 'Forever Young' (Alphaville), and 'Mambo No. 5' (Lou Bega). The court held that Suno needed licenses both for ingesting the compositions during training in the United States and for generating outputs that reproduced them in Germany. The judges found that the AI model had not merely learned abstract patterns but had 'memorized' the protected melodies, harmonies and rhythms, making them recognizable in generated tracks.

The chamber ordered Suno to cease using the six works in its model and to disclose revenues obtained from their unauthorised exploitation. Financial damages will be quantified in a subsequent stage. The court also rejected Suno's argument that only US law should apply because the training occurred in America, ruling that the company's service is operated in Germany and therefore subject to German copyright law. The judgment is not yet final and can be appealed.

Reactions from creators and GEMA

GEMA, which represents around 100,000 composers, lyricists and music publishers, welcomed the decision. Its CEO, Tobias Holzmüller, described the ruling as a clear message for the protection of creative work.

Today, the Chamber made one thing crystal clear: AI models built on stolen intellectual property have no protection under the law. AI service providers must pay for licenses rather than helping themselves to our members' works free of charge.

German musician Peter Maffay, who attended the hearing, also welcomed the outcome. He stressed that human creativity cannot simply be taken without compensation.

AI cannot sweat, cannot cry. That is a human quality. If AI is fed with human work, then the people who made that work must be paid.

Germany's Culture Minister, Wolfram Weimer, called the verdict an important signal for creators' rights in the digital music industry and said a regulatory framework strengthening both innovation and creativity is needed.

Suno's response and next steps

Suno rejected the court's findings and argued that its technology does not store or reproduce existing songs but rather learns mathematical patterns to create new material. In a statement the company said the judgment mischaracterised how its system works and how US law applies, and it is 'evaluating all available options, including an appeal.' The firm also emphasised that it has built safeguards into its platform to prevent the generation of pre-existing songs.

Suno had previously acknowledged in a 2024 US court filing that its training data includes 'essentially all music files of reasonable quality that are accessible on the open internet.' The company was valued at $5.4 billion after raising $400 million in a funding round in June 2026. The ruling does not immediately force Suno to shut down, but it opens the door to licensing models that could compensate rights holders for AI-related revenue losses.

Wider industry implications

The Munich case is the latest in a string of legal battles over the use of copyrighted material to train generative AI. GEMA won a similar suit against OpenAI in November 2025 over the reproduction of protected lyrics. In the United States, the three major record labels – Universal, Sony and Warner – sued Suno and its rival Udio in 2024. Warner Music later settled with Suno in late 2025 and concluded a licence deal, but Universal and Sony continue to litigate. In parallel, the American Federation of Musicians sued Universal and Warner in spring 2026, alleging that the labels licensed recordings featuring its members to AI firms without paying the performers.

The decision also arrives as streaming platforms face a growing influx of machine-generated tracks. With the EU introducing mandatory labelling of AI-generated content, the music industry is now grappling with who should verify and tag millions of new uploads. The Munich judgment, though focused on six specific songs, is being read across the sector as a test case for whether AI companies must negotiate blanket licences with rights societies, rather than relying on fair use or text-and-data mining exceptions.