AFM v. UMG/Warner: labels' dismissal briefing closes in musicians' suit over AI licensing deals

What happened

On 11 September 2026, Universal Music Group and Warner Records (with Atlantic Recording Corp.) filed reply briefs in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, closing briefing on their motions to dismiss the American Federation of Musicians' lawsuit over the labels' AI licensing deals. Both labels ask the court to throw the case out with prejudice.

The AFM sued on 5 June 2026 (first amended complaint 24 July 2026), alleging the labels breached Article 21(a) of the Sound Recording Labor Agreement — the "new use" provision — by licensing recordings its members played on to AI music companies Suno and Udio without paying or crediting those musicians, and without telling the union which recordings were involved. UMG moved to dismiss on 5 August and Warner Records/Atlantic on 14 August; the AFM opposed on 4 September, arguing the contract term is "reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation."

In reply, UMG's lawyers pointed to a 21 July pre-motion conference before Judge Edgardo Ramos, at which union counsel Eyad Asad conceded there is "no underlying agreement for AI use" — a concession UMG says ends the case: "A payment obligation measured by an agreement that does not exist is no payment obligation at all." Warner's brief adds that the musicians were already paid the SRLA's base session rates and that setting a rate for AI use would turn the court into a price-setter. The union and the labels are separately negotiating the next SRLA with AI at the center.

Why it may matter to you

If you are a session or recording musician, this case tests whether existing union contracts require extra payment when your recorded performances are licensed to train or power generative-AI music services. The outcome will shape what leverage musicians have over the label-to-AI-company licensing deals that have proliferated since the majors settled their 2024 infringement suits against Suno and Udio.

What is not yet known

How Judge Ramos will rule on the dismissal motions. These are the parties' arguments, not findings — no court has decided whether the SRLA's "new use" provision covers AI licensing, and no ruling on the merits has been issued.