
  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
    <channel>
      <title>We are the music makers</title>
      <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/latest</link>
      <description>Music tech and AI in music: the news that matters, what we think about it, and a directory of the tools.</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 12:30:00 GMT</lastBuildDate>
      <atom:link href="https://wearethemusicmakers.co/tags/legal/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
      
  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/ai-music-class-actions-tracker</guid>
    <title>AI music class actions tracker: the cases independent artists could be part of</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/ai-music-class-actions-tracker</link>
    <description>A living table of the six proposed class actions that musicians have brought against Suno, Udio and Google, with court, filing date, procedural stage, last development we could confirm, source and the date we read it. No class has been certified in any of them, so no musician is yet a class member.</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 12:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>legal</category><category>lawsuits</category><category>class-action</category><category>ai-music</category><category>artist-rights</category><category>independent-artists</category><category>suno</category><category>udio</category><category>format-tracker</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/trademark-your-artist-name</guid>
    <title>How to trademark your artist name: when it is worth it, what it costs and how to file</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/trademark-your-artist-name</link>
    <description>Your artist or band name starts collecting trademark rights the day you use it in public, but those rights are local and hard to prove. Here is how to check a name, when registration earns its fee, what the US filing costs per class, and how to extend it abroad.</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 25 Oct 2026 03:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>trademarks</category><category>business</category><category>legal</category><category>artist-name</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/ai-music-lawsuits-explained</guid>
    <title>AI music lawsuits explained: the major cases, what they&#39;re about and what happens next</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/learn/ai-music-lawsuits-explained</link>
    <description>Labels, publishers and collecting societies have sued Suno, Udio and Anthropic, and independent artists have filed class actions of their own. This page lists 23 major lawsuits, in 21 rows, with their status as of 23 Oct 2026, explains the four legal questions they turn on, and sets out what each outcome would mean for independent musicians.</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2026 06:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>legal</category><category>lawsuits</category><category>copyright</category><category>ai-music</category><category>artist-rights</category><category>suno</category><category>udio</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/10/reservoir-sues-suno-anthropic-licensing-deals-evidence</guid>
    <title>Reservoir sues Suno and Anthropic, and uses Suno&#39;s own licensing deals as evidence against it</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/10/reservoir-sues-suno-anthropic-licensing-deals-evidence</link>
    <description>Reservoir Media has sued Suno over 1,050 songs and Anthropic over 853, asking for about $338 million in total. Its sharpest argument is that Suno&#39;s deals with Warner, BMG and Believe prove a market for training licences exists. That helps rights owners win; whether it pays songwriters is a separate question.</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 05:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>legal</category><category>suno</category><category>anthropic</category><category>ai-music</category><category>artist-rights</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/10/copyright-office-ai-training-report-still-pre-publication</guid>
    <title>The Copyright Office&#39;s AI training report is still a draft 17 months on, and its critics are using that</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/10/copyright-office-ai-training-report-still-pre-publication</link>
    <description>The US Copyright Office&#39;s report on generative AI training, released as a &quot;pre-publication version&quot; on 9 May 2025, has never been finalised. Its view that some training is fair use and some isn&#39;t, and that market dilution is real harm, is the closest thing music has to an official US position. Litigants cite it, the Justice Department attacks it, and the two big 2025 rulings didn&#39;t cite it at all.</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Oct 2026 04:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>ai</category><category>legal</category><category>copyright</category><category>fair-use</category><category>training-data</category><category>artist-rights</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/umg-distrokid-ai-slop-takedowns</guid>
    <title>UMG calls DistroKid an &quot;AI-slop pipeline&quot;, and human indie artists are getting swept out with the slop</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/umg-distrokid-ai-slop-takedowns</link>
    <description>Universal Music Group sued DistroKid in Delaware on 15 Sep 2026, calling it an &quot;AI-slop pipeline&quot; and citing one account that released 4,562 tracks in a year. DistroKid has since confirmed it removed &quot;a very small number&quot; of recordings in response to UMG&#39;s claims, and independent artists say original and licensed work went with them, with no notice and no clear way to appeal.</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2026 05:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>industry</category><category>distrokid</category><category>umg</category><category>takedowns</category><category>ai-music</category><category>legal</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/copyright-claims-board-small-claims-musicians</guid>
    <title>Small claims for songs: how the US Copyright Claims Board works for musicians</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/copyright-claims-board-small-claims-musicians</link>
    <description>The US Copyright Claims Board lets you pursue an infringement claim of up to $30,000 online, without a lawyer, for a $100 filing fee. It only works if your song is registered (or at least applied for), the other side is in the US, and they choose not to opt out.</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Sep 2026 04:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>artist-rights</category><category>copyright</category><category>legal</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/doj-fair-use-nyt-music-lawyers</guid>
    <title>The DOJ says AI training is fair use. Music&#39;s best arguments were never about training</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/09/doj-fair-use-nyt-music-lawyers</link>
    <description>The US Justice Department has told the court in the New York Times&#39; case against OpenAI that training AI models on copyrighted text is fair use, and it goes out of its way to reject the &quot;market dilution&quot; theory the music industry leans on. It leaves outputs, data sourcing and identity open, and that is where artists&#39; claims are strongest.</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 05:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>artist-rights</category><category>legal</category><category>copyright</category><category>fair-use</category><category>ai-music</category><category>training-data</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/08/france-darcos-bill-sacem-ai-training-burden-of-proof</guid>
    <title>France may flip the burden of proof on AI training: SACEM, its opt-out and the Darcos Bill</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/08/france-darcos-bill-sacem-ai-training-burden-of-proof</link>
    <description>France&#39;s Senate has passed a one-article bill that would presume an AI provider used a protected work whenever there is a plausible sign that it did, leaving the provider to prove otherwise. SACEM, which has opted its repertoire out of AI mining since October 2023, wants it passed. It has been stuck in the National Assembly since June, and the reason it matters is that an opt-out is hard to enforce if you can&#39;t prove your music was used.</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 05:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>ai-music</category><category>artist-rights</category><category>copyright</category><category>legal</category><category>france</category><category>sacem</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/07/gema-suno-munich-ruling-memorisation</guid>
    <title>Munich court: a model that memorises songs is copying them</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2026/07/gema-suno-munich-ruling-memorisation</link>
    <description>A Munich court has largely ruled for GEMA against Suno over six songs, finding they were memorised inside Suno&#39;s v3.5 and v4 models and that this is copying. It also applied US fair use to Suno&#39;s US training and rejected it. The ruling isn&#39;t final, and its limits matter as much as the headline.</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 05:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>legal</category><category>suno</category><category>gema</category><category>ai-music</category><category>artist-rights</category><category>copyright</category>
  </item>

  <item>
    <guid>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2025/03/carey-lipa-plagiarism-suits-fail-sanctions</guid>
    <title>Mariah Carey won sanctions against a Christmas-song plaintiff, and Dua Lipa beat &#39;Levitating&#39;: 2025&#39;s failed plagiarism suits</title>
    <link>https://wearethemusicmakers.co/news/2025/03/carey-lipa-plagiarism-suits-fail-sanctions</link>
    <description>In March 2025 two federal judges threw out song-theft suits against Mariah Carey&#39;s &#39;All I Want for Christmas Is You&#39; and Dua Lipa&#39;s &#39;Levitating&#39;, both because the shared material wasn&#39;t protectable. Carey&#39;s judge went further and sanctioned the plaintiffs&#39; side; in December the bill came to about $92,300 for Carey alone. For songwriters thinking of suing, the lesson is to filter out the building blocks before anyone files.</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2025 04:30:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>We are the music makers</dc:creator>
    <category>artist-rights</category><category>copyright</category><category>legal</category>
  </item>

    </channel>
  </rss>
