Suno is a leading AI-powered music generation platform which transforms simple text prompts, images, videos, or audio clips into fully produced songs complete with vocals and instrumentation. Last week, renowned music producer Timbaland faced backlash after he shared a demo online which was created using Suno’s platform. Shortly after the video was posted, fans noticed that Timbaland’s demo bore a striking resemblance to a beat made by another producer, K Fresh Music. K Fresh’s audible signature tag was even retained in the AI track but no credit was ever given to K Fresh for Suno’s use of his work.

In response, Timbaland told fans that he was simply demonstrating the power of Suno and how songs can be flipped into remixes and added that he had no intention of profiting from the track. This initial response was not enough to quell the criticism. On June 20, 2025, Timbaland posted a statement on his Instagram page formally apologizing to K Fresh and explaining that he should have done his due diligence before using K Fresh’s music. Timbaland also took down the video of him using Suno to remix K Fresh’s music.

Timbaland’s attorney made a statement clarifying that while the use of K Fresh’s music without consent violated Suno’s terms of service, it did not violate the law, explaining that “under the current law, even if a company removes the content, they’re not required to delete anything the AI may have learned from it. That part of the law hasn’t caught up yet, and no court has said otherwise.” His attorney highlighted that these types of gaps need to be closed and that creators should be involved in the process to develop laws to address these issues.

This drama follows lawsuits filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) on behalf of major labels against Suno and another AI platform, Udio in June 2024. RIAA’s suit asserts that the AI platforms infringe the labels’ exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute sound recordings by using copyrighted recordings to train their models. While the platforms do not dispute that their models were trained in this way, they believe their use falls under the fair-use doctrine. Earlier this month it was reported that Universal Music Group, Warner Music Group, and Sony Must Entertainment were in talks to license their work to Suno and Udio as opposed to continuing to litigate their disputes.

Key Takeaways:

• While any deal between the major labels and the platforms would provide a helpful framework for how AI platforms are to compensate artists for their work, it may not resolve the core issue for many creators because the artists themselves are not at the negotiation table. Artists may see no benefit from the deal if their contracts do not entitle them to revenue from this type of AI use (a concern in the early days of streaming) and many artists have no opportunity to consent, negotiate terms, or even know their work is being used.
• Major labels typically control the sound recording but they do not represent the songwriters’ compositions or the performers whose voices and stylistic choices may be replicated and simulated by AI.
• A settlement may solve the legal exposure for AI platforms, but not the ethical crisis for creators. Until artists — especially those whose voices, lyrics, and creative identities fuel the training data — are part of the negotiation, these deals risk replicating the very power imbalances that have long plagued the music industry.

  This publication is published by the law firm of Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP. The publication is intended to present an overview of current legal trends; no article should be construed as representing advice on specific, individual legal matters. Articles may be reprinted with permission and acknowledgment. ECJ is a registered service mark of Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP. All rights reserved.