I think it's not an OR, it's an AND. Suno created something amazing. AND they've earned the negativity.
By going against the law. By not asking permission. By mistreating artists and their own customers, repeatedly (I have too many specifics... From ignoring feedback, gaslighting people, not listening, erasing comments, jacking up prices 4x without telling anyone...)
They spend marketing dollars on spreading the wrong messages about AI in music and that hurts everyone ($0.18 per song, make 500 songs a month, don't pay musicians for background music-make your own, make songs with a button press...)
Our communities who grew up around Suno for a lot from it, but are now full of negativity towards the company because of these years of neglect and mistreatment, yet we come back. The models are, still, pretty great!
BUT.
Suno at the end of the day is on a mission to be the best music generation platform. Great.
Music is not just about generation nor any one instrument.
The piano, many might say, is history's greatest music generation platform to date. Easy to play with the press of a key. So expressive. It can play practically any piece of music.
But clearly music goes far beyond the piano.
Music, and AI music,already goes and will go far beyond anything Suno alone can create. There are plenty of other instruments already, with people playing them to create fantastic music. There are many other ways people use AI in music from ideation to production to performance and more.
Yes, Suno were the first to grow big and have carved out a space for themselves. They've earned a lot of attention, good and bad. But as much as they would like to self style themselves the most important thing in music,... A little perspective and a good serving of humility would do them good.
I hope they start to realize the pains they cause and come back to playing a more friendly part in the music world. But either way, they play a part, and just one part.
Music is boundless and will always be. The symphony of life is far richer than any one person or company or set of ideas. Far richer than 'AI' or 'not' or 'assisted.' it's a reflection of humanity, of nature itself. And I'm excited to hear the upcoming movements in this neverending composition, full of creativity, spirit, and joy for everyone. ❤️🎶
I also find it interesting that in preparation for launching a new licensed AI model, Suno has heavily expanded its internal music team with former label execs - like hiring former Atlantic Records marketing VP Grace James as VP and Head of Artist Marketing and Editorial.
She is supposed to spearhead artist marketing across Suno, which as far as we know means supporting both established artists exploring new workflows and emerging independent creators making their first songs.
Until one's voice shows up in their algorithm. I advise any singer to not put their voice in the Suno coffers. Though I'm tempted to ... there's no way I'm going to put my real voice in there.
Perhaps we’re wrong about Suno in another—and much older—sense.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I was the CEO of the company behind Session Partner. It generated MIDI tracks from randomness, networks, and human-set weights—with no stored patterns and no music used as training data. Parts of its output later appeared in well-known songs played on the radio. Nobody demanded a label, and nobody declared the results non-art.
Developing it taught us something uncomfortable: short chord and note sequences rarely need to be copied to sound familiar. The musically useful ones largely already exist. Creativity moves into weighting, arrangement, variation, and selection—whether the generator is inside a human or visible on a screen.
None of this absolves Suno of licensing or training-data liability. But those are legal and economic questions, not proof that its output cannot be art.
I wrote the longer—and considerably less polite—version here:
I went over the TOS (using Claude, so if this is mistaken, let me know)
The clause is still there, verbatim, from last September's terms. Upload anything and you grant Suno a "worldwide, non-exclusive, fully paid-up, sublicensable (directly and indirectly through multiple tiers), assignable, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable" license over all Content — and explicitly: "This license to your Content and Voice Model includes a license to your likeness, voice rights and other indicia of your persona."
Plus an irrevocable moral-rights waiver
plus express rights to "train, develop, fine-tune" their models on it, with no opt-out, "without compensation to you." remains literally true on September 3.
Basically ... Feed them your voice and your voice is no longer your own.
What changed is ownership of outputs, and it moved against users. Commentary describes the shift as "User Owned" → "Granted Commercial Rights": paid tiers get an "assignment" that is hedged three ways —
A. no warranty any copyright vests at all
B. output "remains subject to these Terms"
C. ...you may only commercially exploit output you obtained via a "permitted download" through an "approved channel..."
That, with monthly download limits set on a page: Suno "may update from time to time." Free-tier tracks can never be monetized, even if you subscribe later. Ownership on a leash.
The two-class system is the story. The Warner deal's artist protections — opt-in control over name, image, likeness, voice — appear nowhere in the TOS. They live in the label agreement, for represented artists only. A signed artist gets consent controls because Warner had litigation leverage; an independent uploader gets the perpetual license.
Yeah, I deep dived the new TOS for this coming term.
They continue to state that they can use your sound, all the time, anywhere, forever. This just doesn't cut it for me.
I am ABSOLUTELY not saying avoid. But know before you go. If you ARE already a professional. If you are already someone with a career, a sound, that you can bank on? I'd avoid it until there is a company that can afford actual protection and ownership.
I think it's not an OR, it's an AND. Suno created something amazing. AND they've earned the negativity.
By going against the law. By not asking permission. By mistreating artists and their own customers, repeatedly (I have too many specifics... From ignoring feedback, gaslighting people, not listening, erasing comments, jacking up prices 4x without telling anyone...)
They spend marketing dollars on spreading the wrong messages about AI in music and that hurts everyone ($0.18 per song, make 500 songs a month, don't pay musicians for background music-make your own, make songs with a button press...)
Our communities who grew up around Suno for a lot from it, but are now full of negativity towards the company because of these years of neglect and mistreatment, yet we come back. The models are, still, pretty great!
BUT.
Suno at the end of the day is on a mission to be the best music generation platform. Great.
Music is not just about generation nor any one instrument.
The piano, many might say, is history's greatest music generation platform to date. Easy to play with the press of a key. So expressive. It can play practically any piece of music.
But clearly music goes far beyond the piano.
Music, and AI music,already goes and will go far beyond anything Suno alone can create. There are plenty of other instruments already, with people playing them to create fantastic music. There are many other ways people use AI in music from ideation to production to performance and more.
Yes, Suno were the first to grow big and have carved out a space for themselves. They've earned a lot of attention, good and bad. But as much as they would like to self style themselves the most important thing in music,... A little perspective and a good serving of humility would do them good.
I hope they start to realize the pains they cause and come back to playing a more friendly part in the music world. But either way, they play a part, and just one part.
Music is boundless and will always be. The symphony of life is far richer than any one person or company or set of ideas. Far richer than 'AI' or 'not' or 'assisted.' it's a reflection of humanity, of nature itself. And I'm excited to hear the upcoming movements in this neverending composition, full of creativity, spirit, and joy for everyone. ❤️🎶
I also find it interesting that in preparation for launching a new licensed AI model, Suno has heavily expanded its internal music team with former label execs - like hiring former Atlantic Records marketing VP Grace James as VP and Head of Artist Marketing and Editorial.
She is supposed to spearhead artist marketing across Suno, which as far as we know means supporting both established artists exploring new workflows and emerging independent creators making their first songs.
Until one's voice shows up in their algorithm. I advise any singer to not put their voice in the Suno coffers. Though I'm tempted to ... there's no way I'm going to put my real voice in there.
I felt the same way as you, although the new terms of service (see yesertday’s Signals) plainly states they don’t own any of your inputs.
I'll check it out
Perhaps we’re wrong about Suno in another—and much older—sense.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I was the CEO of the company behind Session Partner. It generated MIDI tracks from randomness, networks, and human-set weights—with no stored patterns and no music used as training data. Parts of its output later appeared in well-known songs played on the radio. Nobody demanded a label, and nobody declared the results non-art.
Developing it taught us something uncomfortable: short chord and note sequences rarely need to be copied to sound familiar. The musically useful ones largely already exist. Creativity moves into weighting, arrangement, variation, and selection—whether the generator is inside a human or visible on a screen.
None of this absolves Suno of licensing or training-data liability. But those are legal and economic questions, not proof that its output cannot be art.
I wrote the longer—and considerably less polite—version here:
https://substack.com/@steffenrentschler/note/p-211283306
I went over the TOS (using Claude, so if this is mistaken, let me know)
The clause is still there, verbatim, from last September's terms. Upload anything and you grant Suno a "worldwide, non-exclusive, fully paid-up, sublicensable (directly and indirectly through multiple tiers), assignable, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable" license over all Content — and explicitly: "This license to your Content and Voice Model includes a license to your likeness, voice rights and other indicia of your persona."
Plus an irrevocable moral-rights waiver
plus express rights to "train, develop, fine-tune" their models on it, with no opt-out, "without compensation to you." remains literally true on September 3.
Basically ... Feed them your voice and your voice is no longer your own.
What changed is ownership of outputs, and it moved against users. Commentary describes the shift as "User Owned" → "Granted Commercial Rights": paid tiers get an "assignment" that is hedged three ways —
A. no warranty any copyright vests at all
B. output "remains subject to these Terms"
C. ...you may only commercially exploit output you obtained via a "permitted download" through an "approved channel..."
That, with monthly download limits set on a page: Suno "may update from time to time." Free-tier tracks can never be monetized, even if you subscribe later. Ownership on a leash.
The two-class system is the story. The Warner deal's artist protections — opt-in control over name, image, likeness, voice — appear nowhere in the TOS. They live in the label agreement, for represented artists only. A signed artist gets consent controls because Warner had litigation leverage; an independent uploader gets the perpetual license.
Consent has become a privilege of representation.
Did you go over the NEW terms? Because it does address the ownership question. But they ARE still licensed to use your inputs should they choose.
Yeah, I deep dived the new TOS for this coming term.
They continue to state that they can use your sound, all the time, anywhere, forever. This just doesn't cut it for me.
I am ABSOLUTELY not saying avoid. But know before you go. If you ARE already a professional. If you are already someone with a career, a sound, that you can bank on? I'd avoid it until there is a company that can afford actual protection and ownership.
As tempting as it sounds.
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing!
@Itai Leibowitz
Well done. My sentiments exactly….