Virginie Berger, Forbes; Launch, Train, Settle: How Suno And Udio’s Licensing Deals Made Copyright Infringement Profitable
"The Precedent That Pays
Perhaps most concerning is what these partial settlements teach other AI companies: copyright infringement can be a viable business strategy, as long as you only have to answer to those with the resources to sue.
The calculus is straightforward. Build your product using copyrighted material without permission. Grow quickly while competitors who might try to license properly struggle with costs and complexity.
If you get big enough, those with sufficient resources will eventually sue. At that point, negotiate from strength because your technology is already deployed, your users are already dependent on it, and dismantling what you've built would be costly.
The worst case isn't court-ordered damages or shutdown anymore but will be a licensing deal where you finally pay something. But far less than you would have paid to license properly from the start, and only to the major players who could force you to the table. And you keep operating with legitimacy.
Both Suno and Udio can now market themselves as "responsibly licensed" platforms, pointing to their deals with major labels as proof of legitimacy. The narrative shifts from "they stole content to build this" to "they're innovative partners in the future of music.""
