On Friday 6 November 2026, two new federal lawsuits landed against Suno, the AI song generator. One is brought by a group of Elvis Presley rights holders. The other is brought by Eight Mile Style, the publisher that controls hundreds of Eminem recordings. Both were filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, and everything below is what the plaintiffs allege. Suno has not conceded any of it.
The two cases arrived on the same day but take different routes. The Elvis case leans heavily on a voice and likeness law, while the Eminem case centres on the alleged copying of a songwriting catalogue to train an AI model. Here is what each complaint claims, what Suno has said in response, and why the outcome could matter to anyone who makes or listens to AI music.
The Elvis Presley lawsuit
According to Variety, the group of plaintiffs includes Authentic Brands Group, Raleigh Music Publishing and others. Billboard describes the case as filed by Elvis Presley Enterprises, a unit of Authentic Brands Group. The 51-page filing accuses Suno of copyright infringement and of exploiting Presley’s identity whenever users cite his name to generate new songs.
It also alleges a violation of Tennessee’s Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act, known as the ELVIS Act. The 2024 law is aimed at AI voice cloning, and the complaint claims Suno broke it by letting users generate tracks that mirror Presley’s “rich vocal timbre” without permission. Billboard describes the voice-likeness claim as legally novel. Rather than only arguing about what an AI model was trained on, it focuses on what the generated songs are alleged to sound like.
Authentic Brands Group spokeswoman Lark-Marie Anton told Billboard the lawsuit and its evidence “speak for themselves.” The filing comes weeks after the same rights holders sued Anthropic over training on Elvis songs, which we covered in Elvis Presley Song Owners Sue Anthropic Over Claude AI.
The Eight Mile Style lawsuit
The second complaint, case 3:26-cv-13399, is brought by Eight Mile Style, LLC and Martin Affiliated, LLC. According to Copyright Now’s summary of the complaint, the plaintiffs allege that Suno copied 269 Eminem compositions to train its generator, and that it generates infringing outputs. The compositions named include:
- “Lose Yourself”
- “Without Me”
- “Till I Collapse”
- “The Real Slim Shady”
- “Stan”
The complaint sets out three counts:
- Direct copyright infringement, over the alleged copying of the compositions.
- Circumvention of access controls, which in general terms means getting around technical measures that limit access to copyrighted works.
- Removal of copyright management information, the identifying details, such as titles and ownership information, that travel with a work.
The plaintiffs seek statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work, which they total at $40,350,000. Statutory damages are amounts set by law that a court can award, and the figure in the complaint is what the plaintiffs are asking for, not an amount any court has awarded.
Variety notes that Eminem is not individually a plaintiff, and that his representative had not responded to a request for comment.
What Suno says
Suno rejects the idea that it trades on famous names. Its spokesperson Cat McCormack gave this statement to The Verge:
“Suno exists to help people create new, original music, not to trade on anyone’s name or likeness, and we prohibit any unauthorized use of an artist’s work.” — Cat McCormack, Suno spokesperson, as quoted by The Verge
McCormack said Suno does not allow prompts for specific artists’ names and songs, and that it works with third-party providers to screen uploaded audio and lyrics for potential misuse. That response speaks directly to the Elvis complaint, which centres on users citing Presley’s name. Whether those safeguards answer the claims is a question only a court can settle.
The wider picture
These are not the first lawsuits Suno has faced. The Verge notes the new suits closely mirror one filed by Jason Isbell and others in September, which claimed imitation but not direct copyright infringement. The Eight Mile Style complaint, by contrast, includes a direct copyright infringement count.
Engadget reports that Sony Music and Universal Music also filed a joint suit this year over Suno’s v6 models, while Warner dropped its suit in a licensing deal. Taken together, the cases show rights holders testing different legal theories against the same company: training on catalogues, outputs that sound like a specific artist, and the use of famous names in prompts. Nothing here has been decided by a court, and every claim remains an allegation until it is tested.
Why it matters for AI music fans and creators
The fight is moving from “was the training legal?” to “what happens when a prompt points at a real artist’s voice or catalogue?” Much of the earlier argument was about what went into AI models. The Elvis complaint in particular asks about what comes out, and whether a generated vocal that mirrors a famous singer crosses a legal line.
For creators making original songs with AI tools, the practical lessons are:
- Keep prompts free of real artists’ names.
- Check the terms of whichever tool you use.
- Keep records of how a track was made.
For listeners, the cases are a reminder that the rules for AI music are still being worked out in court. The answers will shape which tools stay available and how they can be used.
Original AI music on Dizy
Dizy’s charts showcase original AI-assisted music from independent creators. Explore the Top 40, the Top 100 and New releases, browse AI artists, or, if you make original music, submit your track.
Sources
Variety: Elvis and Eminem rights holders sue Suno
Billboard: Elvis Presley AI voice cloning lawsuit against Suno
The Verge: Elvis and Eminem rights holders’ AI music clone lawsuits against Suno
Copyright Now: Eight Mile Style v. Suno complaint summary
Engadget: Suno AI music generator sued again for copyright infringement
