![\"music](\"https:\/\/www.digitalmusicnews.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/John-Joseph-Moakley-United-States-Courthouse-1024x546.jpg\" "\\"music\\"")
<\/p>\n
The John Joseph Moakley United States Courthouse in Boston (Photo Credit: 4300streetcar)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Music Exactly how many tracks were used to train Suno\u2019s generative models? The world may never know \u2013 at least if the company gets its way. Amid an ugly legal battle with the non-Warner majors, the AI music platform is fighting to conceal the figure. <\/strong><\/h2>\nAs some will recognize, this is the second tooth-and-nail sub-dispute that the high-stakes lawsuit has delivered as of late. Now staring down a supersized<\/a> copyright infringement and DMCA complaint, Suno is also far from eager to divulge the terms of its Warner Music licensing pact.<\/p>\nBut as we reported<\/a>, Universal Music and Sony Music themselves are attempting to secure a copy of the contract. On the other hand, those same plaintiffs are unopposed to Suno\u2019s request to keep the training tally from becoming public information.<\/p>\nRather, New York-based Inner City Press<\/em> (ICP) is pushing to obtain the number \u2013 or, more specifically, to stop Suno impounding the legal docs containing the number.<\/h4>\n\u201cThese are not peripheral discovery documents \u2014 they are the core pleadings and supporting submissions for Plaintiffs\u2019 motion to amend the complaint,\u201d ICP\u2019s Matthew Lee wrote in a letter<\/a> urging the court to deny Suno\u2019s request.<\/p>\nFrom there, Lee argued that the \u201cinformation is of direct public concern,\u201d particularly for the professionals who \u201chave a direct interest in understanding what is alleged about how their recordings were used.\u201d<\/p>\n
In the opposite corner, Suno in a follow-up filing<\/a> framed its request as pertaining to \u201ca single figure\u201d \u2013 referring to \u201cthe total volume of audio files\u201d ingested for training.<\/h4>\n\u201c[T]he sole information Suno seeks to impound is the total number<\/em> of audio files allegedly used to train its model,\u201d the defendant wrote. \u201cSuno has never disclosed that figure publicly, and for good reason.<\/p>\n\u201cIf competitors learned the volume of Suno\u2019s training data\u2014a core component of the tool has [sic] Suno built\u2014they could use that information to replicate and benchmark against Suno\u2019s models, infer aspects of Suno\u2019s training and development process, and potentially optimize their models to unfairly compete with Suno\u2019s by leveraging Suno\u2019s confidential business information,\u201d the platform continued.<\/p>\n
Similarly, Suno co-founder and CTO Georg Kucsko in an almost-verbatim declaration expressed the belief that rival AI developers could capitalize on the training number \u201cto benchmark their own systems against Suno\u2019s model, infer aspects of Suno\u2019s training and development approach, and\u201d more.<\/p>\n
Now, all eyes are on the judge\u2019s determination, which hadn\u2019t made its way into the docket at the time of writing.<\/h4>\n
Elsewhere in the AI litigation arena, Sony Music is charging ahead<\/a> with an expanded action against Udio despite the startup\u2019s Warner Music and Universal Music licensing agreements.<\/p>\nUnsurprisingly, a firm training-volume total hasn\u2019t been publicly disclosed in that suit, either. Sony Music\u2019s review \u201cof Udio\u2019s training data revealed that Udio collected over [redacted] audio files<\/em><\/strong> to build its training dataset,\u201d a relevant line reads.<\/p>\n<\/section><\/div>\n
But as we reported<\/a>, Universal Music and Sony Music themselves are attempting to secure a copy of the contract. On the other hand, those same plaintiffs are unopposed to Suno\u2019s request to keep the training tally from becoming public information.<\/p>\n \u201cThese are not peripheral discovery documents \u2014 they are the core pleadings and supporting submissions for Plaintiffs\u2019 motion to amend the complaint,\u201d ICP\u2019s Matthew Lee wrote in a letter<\/a> urging the court to deny Suno\u2019s request.<\/p>\n From there, Lee argued that the \u201cinformation is of direct public concern,\u201d particularly for the professionals who \u201chave a direct interest in understanding what is alleged about how their recordings were used.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201c[T]he sole information Suno seeks to impound is the total number<\/em> of audio files allegedly used to train its model,\u201d the defendant wrote. \u201cSuno has never disclosed that figure publicly, and for good reason.<\/p>\n \u201cIf competitors learned the volume of Suno\u2019s training data\u2014a core component of the tool has [sic] Suno built\u2014they could use that information to replicate and benchmark against Suno\u2019s models, infer aspects of Suno\u2019s training and development process, and potentially optimize their models to unfairly compete with Suno\u2019s by leveraging Suno\u2019s confidential business information,\u201d the platform continued.<\/p>\n Similarly, Suno co-founder and CTO Georg Kucsko in an almost-verbatim declaration expressed the belief that rival AI developers could capitalize on the training number \u201cto benchmark their own systems against Suno\u2019s model, infer aspects of Suno\u2019s training and development approach, and\u201d more.<\/p>\n Elsewhere in the AI litigation arena, Sony Music is charging ahead<\/a> with an expanded action against Udio despite the startup\u2019s Warner Music and Universal Music licensing agreements.<\/p>\n Unsurprisingly, a firm training-volume total hasn\u2019t been publicly disclosed in that suit, either. Sony Music\u2019s review \u201cof Udio\u2019s training data revealed that Udio collected over [redacted] audio files<\/em><\/strong> to build its training dataset,\u201d a relevant line reads.<\/p>\n<\/section><\/div>\nRather, New York-based Inner City Press<\/em> (ICP) is pushing to obtain the number \u2013 or, more specifically, to stop Suno impounding the legal docs containing the number.<\/h4>\n
In the opposite corner, Suno in a follow-up filing<\/a> framed its request as pertaining to \u201ca single figure\u201d \u2013 referring to \u201cthe total volume of audio files\u201d ingested for training.<\/h4>\n
Now, all eyes are on the judge\u2019s determination, which hadn\u2019t made its way into the docket at the time of writing.<\/h4>\n