The HAVEN. AI Song "I Run" Removed: Navigating Copyright in the Age of AI Music

Lisa Ernst · 05.02.2026 · Artificial Intelligence · 10 min

The promise of artificial intelligence to revolutionize music creation has arrived, offering tools like Suno that can generate melodies and vocals from simple text prompts. As a journalist, I have observed firsthand the explosive growth of such technologies, juxtaposed with the historical patterns of adaptation and conflict that accompany disruptive innovation. The music industry, long accustomed to battling unauthorized use of its content, now faces a new frontier where AI models learn from and even imitate copyrighted works, raising profound questions about ownership, compensation, and the future of artistic expression.

Source: Own illustration

Quick summary:

• The AI-generated song "I Run" by HAVEN. AI was removed from platforms like TikTok and Spotify around November 14, 2025.
• The removal was due to allegations that the AI-generated vocals imitated Jorja Smith, raising concerns about potential copyright infringement.
• The artist HAVEN. has since re-recorded the track with a human singer, and this version is now available.
• This incident highlights ongoing legal and ethical challenges in AI music, particularly concerning copyright and imitation.
• Major music labels have filed lawsuits against AI companies like Suno and Udio, while some, like Warner Music Group and Universal Music Group, have also formed partnerships and licensing agreements.

A Shifting Landscape: Legal Battles and Breakthroughs for AI Music

The year 2025 has seen significant movement in the legal landscape surrounding AI-generated music. One notable instance involved the song "I Run" by HAVEN. AI, which was removed from platforms like TikTok and Spotify around November 14, 2025. Allegations suggested the AI-generated vocals imitated Jorja Smith, pointing to potential copyright infringement.

The artist subsequently re-recorded the track with a human singer, a version now available. This incident highlights the critical issues of copyright and imitation that AI models, including Suno, face within the music industry.

Major music labels have been at the forefront of these legal challenges. In June 2024, the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) announced lawsuits filed by Sony Music Entertainment, UMG Recordings, Inc., and Warner Records, Inc. against AI music generators Suno and Udio. The labels accused both companies of profiting from the unlicensed reproduction of existing songs and producing tracks indiscernible from those by real artists, as detailed in the Los Angeles Times coverage and the RIAA’s official announcement. They characterized AI’s use as "mass theft" and a threat to the music ecosystem. This sentiment echoed a broader chorus from approximately 200 artists, including Billie Eilish and Nicki Minaj, who demanded an end to the "predatory" use of AI in music in 2024.

However, amidst these disputes, new partnerships have also emerged. Warner Music Group (WMG) announced a significant collaboration with Suno in November 2025, effectively settling their previous legal disagreements, which you can read more about on WMG’s investor relations page. This agreement allows WMG artists to decide whether their names, voices, and compositions can be used in AI-generated music, opening potential new revenue streams. Under the terms of this partnership, Suno plans to introduce licensed models in 2026 and implement download restrictions, preventing free users from downloading songs while offering paying users download limits. WMG also reached a similar agreement with AI company Udio, resolving another legal conflict, as reported by the Los Angeles Times. Universal Music Group (UMG) also settled with Udio in October 2025, licensing its catalog under an opt-in principle for artists. Sony Music, however, a co-plaintiff in the Udio case, has yet to reach a similar resolution.

Intellectual Property and the Case Against Suno

Suno, founded in 2023 by former Kensho employees Michael Shulman, Georg Kucsko, Martin Camacho, and Keenan Freyberg, has grown rapidly, claiming nearly 100 million users on its platform.

Source: elevenlabs.io

The Suno AI platform logo, representing a service that has attracted nearly 100 million users since its 2023 founding.

The company also secured a $250 million funding round, valuing it at $2.45 billion. Despite this success, the lack of transparency regarding the data used to train its AI has been a central point of contention. While Suno co-founder Michael Shulman asserts their approach is "legal" and "quite similar to others," experts like Ed Newton Rex, former head of audio development at Stability AI, have noted Suno’s ability to generate songs featuring voices and melodies from real artists and existing songs. Although Suno blocks prompts containing artist names, Rex points out that misspellings can circumvent this filter.

In Germany, the performing rights organization GEMA filed a lawsuit against Suno on January 21, 2025, as documented on Wikipedia. GEMA alleges that Suno used known works for training its AI without paying artists, citing examples like Alphaville’s "Forever Young," Kristina Bach’s "Atemlos," Lou Bega’s "Mambo No. 5," Frank Farian’s "Daddy Cool," and Modern Talking’s "Cheri Cheri Lady." The GEMA argues that the resemblance in vocal timbre of Suno-generated recordings to known performers serves as evidence of training with their members’ works. GEMA’s broader stance supports AI as a creative tool but demands fair compensation for the use of copyrighted content in training, having declared an opt-out for member works in text and data mining to prevent unauthorized AI training. Their current legal actions aim to ensure creators receive fair compensation and to establish a viable licensing model for generative AI.

Suno AI Version History

Suno has rapidly evolved since its inception, releasing several versions of its AI music generation platform:

Suno AI has also expanded its reach, becoming available on iOS and Android in Germany since Fall 2024.

The Broader Legal Landscape for AI and Copyright

The issues faced by Suno and Udio are part of a larger wave of copyright litigation against AI companies. Over 70 lawsuits by copyright holders against AI companies emerged in 2025. Notable cases include the $1.5 billion settlement in Bartz v. Anthropic, where Anthropic was held liable for training its AI on millions of pirated works. Conversely, the case of Kadrey v. Meta saw the use of books for training Meta’s large language model deemed "highly transformative" and fair use, though the ruling was narrowly defined.

Copyright Battles Across Media

Beyond music, other forms of media also grapple with these concerns. Disney and Universal sued Midjourney in June 2025 for direct and secondary copyright infringement related to AI-generated images from their Marvel and Star Wars franchises. Warner Bros. Entertainment filed a similar lawsuit in September 2025, later consolidated with the Disney case. These same companies, along with Universal, also sued Chinese company Minimax, operator of the AI image and video generator Hailuo AI.

Publishing houses have also taken action. Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Inc. sued Perplexity in September 2025 for unauthorized use of their publications for Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) services. Perplexity was also sued by the Associated Press and The New York Times in December 2025 for unauthorized content use to train its AI platforms. Advance sued Cohere in early 2025, alleging unlicensed reproduction of news and magazine articles to train its LLM systems.

Authors have initiated multiple class-action lawsuits against major tech companies. In September 2025, a group of authors sued Apple for the unlicensed use of books to train its OpenELM LLM models, with another class-action suit following in October. These lawsuits claim Apple trained its AI on the RedPajama dataset, which includes pirated copies from the Books3 dataset.

Source: zhuanlan.zhihu.com

A visual representation of the controversial RedPajama dataset, which allegedly contains pirated books used to train AI models without authorization.

In November 2025, the same group of authors extended their class-action suit to Salesforce for the unlicensed use of their books to train the CodeGen and XGen LLM series. Author Elizabeth Lyon also filed a class-action lawsuit against Adobe in December 2025 for the unlicensed use of text works to train its SlimLM.

Even video artists are entering the fray, with Ted Entertainment suing ByteDance (TikTok’s parent company) in December 2025, accusing them of circumventing technical measures to scrape millions of copyrighted YouTube videos.

Musicians, both independent and established, are seeking redress. Country musician Anthony Justice sued Suno and Udio in June 2025 on behalf of a group of musicians for the unauthorized use of his sound recordings. Another group of musicians, led by David Woulard, filed class-action lawsuits against Udio and Suno in October 2025 for the unlicensed use of sound recordings and musical works, including DMCA infringement claims related to "stream ripping" from YouTube.

Frequently Asked Questions About AI Music and Copyright

Conclusion

The rise of AI music generation tools like Suno presents both incredible creative opportunities and serious challenges to established copyright law and artists' rights. While some disputes are reaching resolutions through partnerships and licensing agreements, others are intensifying through litigation. These legal battles are not merely about compensation; they are shaping a new ethical and commercial framework for the interaction between human creativity and artificial intelligence. The outcomes will define how artists are protected, how AI models are trained, and ultimately, who controls the soundtrack of our future.