# Suno Challenges Apple on Music Catalog Survival > Suno demands Apple testify on whether Apple Music could survive without UMG and Sony catalogs, claiming labels use them as a cudgel for anti-AI concessions. - Title: Suno Challenges Apple on Music Catalog Survival | Shortify - Summary: Suno demands Apple testify on whether Apple Music could survive without UMG and Sony catalogs, claiming labels use them as a cudgel for anti-AI concessions… - Keywords: suno, apple music, umg, sony music, copyright, ai music, streaming fraud, royalty pools, anti-ai concessions, federal court, march 2026, december 1 2026 - Source: Music Business Worldwide — https://musicbusinessworldwide.com/suno-fights-to-make-apple-testify-on-whether-apple-music-could-survive-without-umg-and-sony-claiming-the-majors-use-their-catalogs-as-a-cudgel-to-win-anti-ai-concessions - Published: 2026-10-30T08:47:52+00:00 - Read time: 1 min - Topics: suno, apple music, umg, sony music, copyright, ai music, streaming fraud, royalty pools, anti-ai concessions, federal court, march 2026, december 1 2026 ## Suno's Legal Challenge Suno filed opposition to Apple's motion to block deposition questions about Apple Music's survival without UMG and Sony catalogs. > Suno is fighting to make Apple answer questions, under oath, about whether Apple Music could survive without the catalogs of Universal Music Group and Sony Music ## Apple's Motion to Block Apple asked a California federal court to block Suno's deposition questions, calling topics irrelevant, overbroad, and disproportionate. > Apple casts itself as a bystander whose 'sole connection' to this case is that its service is one of several places where music 'can be played' ## Suno's Core Argument Suno claims UMG and Sony made Apple Music central to the case, using their catalogs as a cudgel to win anti-AI concessions. > Plaintiffs’ theory of market harm depends on what happens on platforms like Apple’s, one of the labels’ biggest digital music partners ## Copyright Lawsuit Background UMG and Sony sued Suno in June 2024 over 560 recordings, seeking up to $150,000 per work infringed. > The labels are seeking up to USD $150,000 per work infringed, a theoretical maximum of around USD $84 million ## Suno's Fair Use Defense Suno argues labels' deals with Apple set royalty calculations, excluding AI content from royalty pools. > Plaintiffs’ complaint explicitly names Apple Music as a destination for Suno outputs ## Suno's Copyright Misuse Claim Suno claims labels use their catalogs as a cudgel to extract anti-AI concessions beyond copyright law. > The core of Suno’s copyright misuse defense is that Plaintiffs use their copyright monopoly and ‘must have’ catalog as a cudgel ## Apple's Fraud Detection Apple deployed AI-generated music detection tool in March 2026, identifying 2 billion fraudulent streams. > Apple recently reported that its efforts to address the flood of AI uploads included exclusion of 2 billion fraudulent streams last year ## Suno's Testimony Request Suno seeks Apple testimony on licensing negotiations, Apple Music viability without catalogs, streaming fraud, and label communications. > Suno has agreed to accept a written sworn statement from Apple on five of the nine topics in its original demand ## Apple's Counterargument Apple claims Suno's questions are a fishing expedition to gain insight into Apple's business operations. > Apple calls Suno’s questions about the viability of Apple Music without the majors 'a fishing expedition by a new entrant to the music industry' ## Hearing Date A hearing on Apple's motion is scheduled for December 1, 2026, before Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi. > A hearing on Apple’s motion is scheduled for December 1 before Magistrate Judge Virginia K. DeMarchi ## Key takeaway Suno seeks Apple testimony on Apple Music's viability without major labels' catalogs, arguing the labels exploit their catalogs to extract anti-AI concessions.