Vai al contenuto

Cookie di analisi

Usiamo Google Analytics e Google Tag Manager per contare le visite e capire quali pagine sono utili. Se accetti, Google Analytics può impostare cookie per riconoscere le tue visite successive. Se rifiuti, non imposta alcun cookie, ma Google riceve comunque un segnale senza cookie per ogni pagina che visiti. Non inviamo a Google il tuo nome, il tuo indirizzo e-mail né i dati della tua registrazione, e puoi cambiare la tua scelta in qualsiasi momento da «Impostazioni cookie» in fondo alla pagina. Privacy

Questa traduzione dell'interfaccia è una bozza e non è stata rivista da una persona madrelingua. L'inglese è la versione di riferimento. English

Jason Isbell leads class action accusing Suno of "musical identity theft" via name and voice prompts

1 set 2026 · Raccolto automaticamente da fonti pubbliche. Non revisionato da una persona.

Questo contenuto è disponibile solo nella lingua originale (inglese).

What happened

On 1 September 2026, Grammy-winning singer-songwriter Jason Isbell filed a class action against Suno in federal court in Massachusetts, joined by Carly Simon, Buddy Guy, Common, Chief Keef, David Lowery, Guy Forsyth and Eduardo Calle. Unlike the existing copyright suits against Suno, the complaint's central claim is right of publicity: that Suno appropriated the plaintiffs' names, voices and identifiable artistic traits and used them as commercial tools to attract paying users without consent.

The complaint alleges Suno's artist-name prompt blocks are trivially bypassed (using legal names instead of stage names, or spacing letters), making the protections cosmetic. The plaintiffs ask the court to treat identity-based prompts as a commercial exploitation of artist identity, while conceding preemption by federal copyright law is the largest hurdle: Suno is expected to argue the claims are really copyright claims in disguise.

Why it matters to creators

If the theory survives, it would give every musician, voice actor and creator whose name or voice can summon their sound in a prompt a right-of-publicity lever independent of song-by-song copyright claims — potentially the most consequential legal theory yet for voice/likeness claims against generative music tools. A preemption loss, by contrast, would push such claims back into the harder terrain of federal copyright.

What is not yet known

No motion-to-dismiss ruling yet; preemption is unresolved and the case may be dismissed at the pleading stage. Separately, a 2 October 2026 MLex-reported filing by Lowery and Isbell invoking state right-of-publicity law and the Illinois biometric privacy law (voiceprints) may be a distinct development — the underlying wire source was not read in full, so it is flagged here rather than filed separately.

Fonti