Suno just closed a $250 million funding round that values the company at an eye-popping $2.45 billion — a staggering jump for a startup that turns text prompts into complete songs and claims to be “democratizing” music creation. Investors led by Menlo Ventures and others are pouring cash into a product that, until the courts decide otherwise, is built on foundations that many creators say were stolen.
That valuation comes as Suno faces blistering legal action from the music industry, with the RIAA and major labels accusing the company of training its models on copyrighted songs taken from the internet without permission, even alleging technical circumvention of streaming protections. This isn’t a squabble over taste — it’s a full-on accusation that tech founders borrowed artists’ work without paying, then sold the dream of “free creation” to gullible investors.
At the same time, a rival startup, Udio, struck a settlement with Warner and Universal, showing the labels are willing to negotiate licenses rather than be steamrolled — a path Suno appears reluctant to follow. Those settlements include plans for licensed AI tools and fingerprinting systems to protect creators, highlighting that there is a lawful path forward that respects artists’ rights and the rule of law.
Meanwhile Suno touts real-world impacts: the company says millions have used the platform, it has launched apps and tools for pros and hobbyists alike, and investors point to charting AI-generated tracks and high-profile producer endorsements as proof the product works. But popularity and venture funding do not erase the fact that the product’s rise coincides with allegations of mass appropriation of other people’s labor.
The legal stakes are enormous — plaintiffs are seeking statutory damages that could reach hundreds of thousands per infringed work, and industry lawyers warn the tab could total billions if courts find mass infringement. This is not abstract tech-lingo; it’s a potential transfer of real wealth away from songwriters, session musicians, and small record labels toward a tiny class of investors and coders.
As conservatives who believe in property, contract, and fair play, we should be deeply skeptical of a Silicon Valley model that monetizes itself by skimming the value created by others and then hiding behind “innovation” as a get-out-of-responsibility card. Entrepreneurs deserve reward for real invention, but not when that reward is built on ripping off the labor and livelihoods of working artists who built the culture we cherish.
Congress and state attorneys general should stop treating this as a moral gray zone and start enforcing the same standards of property rights and accountability online that we demand everywhere else. If lawmakers refuse to act, hardworking creators will be second-class citizens in their own industry while outsized venture bets reap the profit, and that is not the America most of us want to leave our children.
