Musicians' union sues Universal and Warner for cutting session players out of their Suno and Udio AI deals
The American Federation of Musicians sued Universal Music and Warner Music on June 5, 2026, alleging the labels pocketed money from their Suno and Udio AI deals without paying the session musicians whose recordings were copied. The 16-page breach-of-contract complaint, filed in New York federal court, names Universal and Warner but not Sony Music, which has not settled with either AI company.
What the AFM says Universal and Warner owe its members
The union’s case rests on its Sound Recording Labor Agreement with the majors. Under Article 21, the AFM says, members are owed a share of any “new use” of recordings they performed on. Licensing those recordings to Suno and Udio for AI training and derivative output is a new use, the complaint argues, so the payment obligation is triggered.
The labels haven’t shared, according to the suit. The AFM also says Universal and Warner “have not provided the AFM with the names of artists who appeared or worked on recordings that have been licensed to or otherwise obtained by Suno and Udio.” Universal settled with Udio, while Warner licensed both Udio and Suno, deals the labels have talked up while their litigation against Suno continued. The union is seeking damages, attorneys’ fees, and a declaration that the labels breached the contract.
Failed to share in the settlement proceeds, despite their self-congratulatory claims of protecting those same artists.
Does a session contract follow the work into an AI licensing deal?
If you played on major-label sessions, this suit is about whether your contract follows your work into an AI licensing deal you never saw. The majors framed their Suno and Udio settlements as a win for artists. The AFM is testing whether that win reaches the people in the room when the tape rolled, or stops at the rights holder.
The bigger question is how many similar claims follow. Universal and Warner have also struck AI deals with Klay Vision and, in Spotify’s case, an AI remix product, each one a new pool of money with the same unanswered question: who downstream gets paid.
Frequently asked questions
Why is the American Federation of Musicians suing Universal Music and Warner Music?
The AFM alleges Universal and Warner breached their collective bargaining agreement by licensing and settling with AI firms Suno and Udio without sharing the proceeds with the session musicians whose recordings were used. The union calls generative AI licensing a "new use" that triggers payment under the contract.
What is the "new use" clause the AFM lawsuit relies on?
The claim rests on Article 21 of the AFM's Sound Recording Labor Agreement with the major labels. The union says that clause entitles members to a share of revenue from any new use of recordings they performed on, and that licensing those recordings to Suno and Udio for AI training and output is exactly that kind of new use.
Which labels did the AFM lawsuit name, and why not Sony?
The complaint names Universal Music and Warner Music. It leaves out Sony Music, which has not settled with Suno or Udio. Universal settled with Udio, while Warner has licensed both Udio and Suno.
About the author
Covering AI music tools, industry shifts, and news for music creators and professionals. Twice-weekly newsletter at aimusicpreneur.com.
