IP Law Daily, COPYRIGHT—D. Mass.: Record labels can add anti-circumvention claim in AI lawsuit, (Aug 25, 2026)

By Jonathan Anderson

The court cautioned that evaluation of the claim will require further factual development.

The federal district court in Boston allowed a group of record companies and related entities to add an anti-circumvention claim to a copyright infringement lawsuit against generative artificial intelligence (AI) firm Suno, Inc. Plaintiffs accuse Suno of copying their recordings to train an AI model for its Suno AI service, which generates music in response to text prompts. Plaintiffs sought to add the anti-circumvention claim after Suno disclosed in discovery that it used open-source software to download audio files of YouTube videos. The court held that at this stage of the litigation, plaintiffs met the standard to amend their complaint, even though the factual record needs to be developed further as the suit proceeds (UMG Recordings, Inc. v. Suno, Inc., No. 1:24-cv-11611-FDS (D. Mass. Aug. 18, 2026)).

Background. According to the original complaint, Suno is a generative AI service that creates digital music files “within seconds of receiving a user’s prompts.” Plaintiffs allege that defendants copied their sound recordings to train an AI model in violation of their copyright rights.

The complaint originally asserted only claims of copyright infringement against the Suno service. However, in response to an interrogatory in discovery asking how Suno acquired its training data, Suno disclosed that it downloaded audio files of videos posted on YouTube using open-source, third-party software tools. Considering this new information, plaintiffs moved to amend the complaint for violation of 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(1) of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA), which proscribes “circumvent[ing] a technological measure that effectively controls access to a [copyrighted] work.”

The proposed amended complaint contends that YouTube employs a “rolling cipher” measure to prevent users from directly downloading media files. Plaintiffs allege that YouTube maintains two URLs for any given video: The page URL is visible to the user and displays the video player, while the file URL is not visible to the user and contains the audiovisual file that is played within the video player. The file URL is “encrypted” using a periodically changing algorithm called a “rolling cipher,” which is designed to prevent or inhibit downloading, copying, or distribution of the videos.

Suno opposed the motion, arguing that YouTube’s technological measures inhibit copying of copyrighted works but does not control access to them.

Analysis. The DMCA distinguishes between technological measures that control access to a copyrighted work (access controls) and technological measures that impede copying or another infringing use of a copyrighted work (copy or use controls). At issue here is the alleged circumvention of an access control under § 1201(a)(1).

To state a claim under § 1201(a)(1), a complaint must plausibly allege that the defendant (1) circumvented a technological measure (2) that effectively controls access (3) to a copyrighted work. The court held that the proposed amended complaint meets that standard by alleging that YouTube’s rolling cipher encrypts the file URL that contains the copyrighted sound recordings.

Defendants argued that the rolling cipher is not an “access control” under § 1201(a) because YouTube allows users to stream plaintiffs’ copyrighted sound recordings for free. Defendants further asserted that there are no technological measures gatekeeping that content and no application of information or other authorized process is required to gain access to it. Defendants claimed the rolling cipher could not be an access control because the sound recordings are accessible without encountering any technological measure, and that instead, the rolling cipher is a copy control, the circumvention of which is not proscribed by the DMCA.

However, the court held that defendants’ argument cannot be resolved on the pleadings. The fact that YouTube users can access the copyrighted works for free does not, on its own, establish that the rolling cipher fails to effectively control access, according to the court. Under the statute, the relevant question is whether a technological measure ordinarily requires an authorized process to gain access.

The Case is No. 1:24-cv-11611-FDS.

Judge: Saylor, F.

Attorneys: Daniel J. Cloherty (Cloherty & Steinberg LLP) for UMG Recordings, Inc. Alexis Kellert Godfrey (Latham & Watkins LLP) for Suno, Inc.

Companies: UMG Recordings, Inc.; Suno, Inc.

Cases: Copyright MassachusettsNews TechnologyInternet