Elvis and Eminem rights holders sue AI music generator Suno

New legal challenges for Suno

Music rights holders for Elvis Presley and the publisher of much of Eminem’s catalog have filed two separate federal lawsuits against the AI music generator Suno. These cases were filed on November 6 in the Northern District of California. The lawsuits accuse the company of using copyrighted material and artist identities to create new content without permission.

The legal team representing the plaintiffs includes attorney Richard Busch, who has experience in high-profile music copyright cases. The attorneys argue that AI companies are turning the creative work and identities of famous performers into commercial products without authorization. They claim that the technology allows users to reproduce the specific characteristics of these artists for profit.

Suno has already faced a series of legal challenges from other major entities in the music industry. While Warner Music Group settled a previous case last year, Universal Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment are currently pursuing their own claims. These actions reflect a broader trend of the music industry seeking to establish clear boundaries for generative AI.

The Presley and Eminem claims

The lawsuit regarding Elvis Presley was brought by a group that includes Authentic Brands Group and Raleigh Music Publishing. This 51-page complaint alleges that Suno copied 859 Presley compositions to train its AI system. The plaintiffs argue that the platform enables users to generate music that imitates Presley’s specific vocal style and likeness.

In a separate but simultaneous filing, Eight Mile Style accused Suno of infringing on 269 works from the Eminem catalog. The publisher claims the company used these materials to train its model, which then allows users to produce songs and lyrics that resemble Eminem’s unique style. Notably, Eminem himself is not listed as a plaintiff in this specific case.

The attorneys for the Presley estate used a striking metaphor to describe the situation. They wrote in the complaint that "The next Elvis won't pick up a guitar." This statement underscores the concern that AI can replace the need for human performance by mimicking the output of legendary figures.

Voice protection and the ELVIS Act

A significant portion of the Presley lawsuit relies on Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, which was passed in 2024. This law was specifically designed to protect artists against the unauthorized commercial use of their voice and image. The plaintiffs are using this legislation to argue against the reproduction of Presley’s "rich vocal timbre" by AI systems.

The use of such legislation marks a shift in how artists can defend their likeness in the digital age. By invoking the ELVIS Act, the rights holders are attempting to create a legal shield against technologies that can clone a person's unique sonic identity. They argue that these protections are necessary to prevent the exploitation of an artist's persona.

These lawsuits are part of a growing body of litigation involving various musicians, including Americana singer Jason Isbell. These cases aim to determine who is responsible for the material produced by users of generative tools. The courts will have to decide if the training process itself constitutes infringement or if only the final output matters.

Suno's defense and safeguards

Suno has defended its practices by highlighting the safeguards the company has implemented to prevent misuse. The company states that it does not permit users to use prompts that include specific artist names or individual songs. They aim to prevent the direct generation of content that mimics a specific famous performer.

To further protect against unauthorized content, Suno claims to use third-party systems to screen any audio or lyrics that users upload to the platform. These systems are intended to identify and block potential misuse of copyrighted material. The company maintains that these measures are in place to ensure the tool is used responsibly by its users.

Despite these safeguards, the music industry remains skeptical about the impact of generative AI on creative rights. The ongoing litigation will likely examine whether these filters are sufficient to prevent the underlying models from being trained on protected works. The outcome of these cases could dictate how AI companies interact with major music catalogs in the future.

The future of music copyright

These lawsuits represent a critical turning point in the intersection of artificial intelligence and intellectual property law. As more artists see their catalogs used to train large-scale models, the demand for clear licensing rules increases. The courts will need to balance the development of new technology with the rights of the original creators.

The legal battle highlights a core tension: whether the act of