Key holding or allegation
The court found protected compositions reproducibly contained in Suno models and found infringing outputs; it also applied U.S. law to U.S. training acts and rejected fair use on the facts presented.
Why it matters
Highly significant cross-border AI-music decision connecting model memorisation, output infringement and choice-of-law treatment of U.S. training.
Facts
GEMA alleged that Suno models memorised protected compositions and produced outputs reproducing substantial protected musical expression; training occurred in the United States while model/output conduct was litigated in Germany.
Issues before the court
Model-level reproduction, output infringement, territorial choice of law and U.S. fair use for U.S. training acts.
What the court did not decide
First-instance judgment only and fact-specific; does not establish that all U.S. AI training would fail fair use.
Procedural timeline
LG Munchen I
First-instance merits judgment: Protected compositions were found reproducibly contained in Suno models and infringing outputs were found; U.S. law was applied to U.S. training acts and fair use rejected on the facts.