The American Federation of Musicians (AFM) has urged a New York federal court to let its lawsuit against Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group proceed, rejecting the majors’ effort to dismiss the case over their AI licensing deals with Suno and Udio.
The union says the deals triggered the “new use” provision of its collective bargaining agreement with Universal and Warner, which it argues requires the labels to compensate members whose recordings were licensed to the AI companies.
It argues that this “new use” provision is contained within Article 21(a) of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement (SRLA) – something the two major music companies dispute.
At issue is whether the musicians who performed on those recordings are owed a share of the revenue flowing from the majors’ settlements and licenses with Suno and Udio.
In its response to the labels’ dismissal bids, filed on Friday (July 17) the AFM told Judge Edgardo Ramos that Article 21(a) of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement (SRLA) “is ambiguous and susceptible to more than a single interpretation.”
The union argued in the letter, which you can read here, that Article 21(a) imposes “an independent, mandatory payment obligation” – the company “shall pay” – and that any reference to other AFM agreements goes to how much is owed, not whether payment is due.
The provision applies to “all new uses,” the union said, “not simply those with a rate already established in another AFM agreement,” and it called the contrary reading “nonsensical.”
“Past practice confirms this: For example, when companies first licensed music for video games, no AFM agreement had set a rate for that use, yet the parties treated it as a new use for both notification and payment purposes.”
American Federation of Musicians
“Past practice confirms this: For example, when companies first licensed music for video games, no AFM agreement had set a rate for that use, yet the parties treated it as a new use for both notification and payment purposes,” the AFM wrote.
Even if Article 21(a) requires that a rate already exist, the union argued, likely AI uses fall under rates the SRLA already sets.
“Since the SRLA sets rates for streaming, an AI recording on a streaming platform would be covered,” the AFM said.
“Other likely AI uses – video games, sampling, commercials – are similarly subject to express SRLA rates.”
The union’s response follows separate bids by Universal and Warner to have the case thrown out, each filed as a letter requesting a pre-motion conference ahead of a motion to dismiss.
In its July 7 letter, UMG argued that Article 21(a) “is a rate conversion provision, not an open-ended royalty provision,” covering only new uses for which another AFM agreement already sets a rate.
Warner, in a letter filed on July 10, argued that the union brought the lawsuit “in an improper attempt to place a judicial thumb on the negotiation scales,” as previously reported by MBW.
The company argued that Article 21 “merely points to other agreements” and “does not itself confer legal rights,” and that because no AFM agreement covers AI licensing, the provision “has nothing to point to, and there is no entitlement to payment.”
Both majors also asked the court to pause discovery while their challenges are decided, a request the AFM opposed, telling the court that “a stay of discovery is the exception and not the rule in this District.”
The AFM also said in a separate letter that it would amend its complaint to name Warner Records, Inc. as the defendant rather than Warner Music Group Corp., after Warner argued that the parent company was not a proper party.
The AFM sued Universal and Warner in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York on June 5.
Its complaint alleges that the two companies breached the SRLA by licensing recordings made by its members to Suno and Udio without compensation or credit.
In that complaint, the union stated that the “use of sound recordings in generative AI software models is not a purpose covered by the SRLA” – a line Warner has cited as a concession that AFM members have no claim.
Universal settled its copyright case against Udio in late October 2025, announcing a compensatory settlement and a license agreement for a new AI music platform.
Warner reached its own settlement and licensing deal with Udio in mid-November 2025, and days later became the first major to settle its copyright case with Suno, with the AI company acquiring Warner’s Songkick platform as part of that deal.
Sony Music, which has not settled with either AI company, is not a party to the AFM case.
The three majors first sued Suno and Udio in 2024, in a case coordinated by the RIAA that alleged “mass infringement” of copyright.
The AFM and the labels are negotiating the next SRLA, with AI at the center of the talks.
Judge Ramos has yet to rule on whether to let the majors move to dismiss or to pause discovery.Music Business Worldwide
