Case to Watch: Independent Musicians and Songwriters Sue Suno Under Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”)

Popular AI music generator Suno allows musicians and non-musicians alike to generate “radio-quality” music in a matter of minutes. But Suno has faced growing criticism for the methods it uses to train the AI models that power its platform. Musicians, producers, distributors and other music professionals throughout the country have alleged that Suno has knowingly committed significant violations of federal copyright laws by training its models with unlicensed, pirated music, which ultimately threatens the livelihoods of musicians everywhere.  

In October 2025, numerous plaintiffs in Illinois joined the mounting number of lawsuits against Suno and filed a putative class action alleging violations of federal copyright laws. See Woulard et al. v. Suno, Inc., No. 1:25-cv-12684, Dkt. 1 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 16, 2025) (“Woulard Action”). The Woulard Action plaintiffs have alleged that in order to train the AI models used to generate instant songs for users, Suno has amassed an arsenal of musical compositions by illicitly downloading them using a technique known as “stream-ripping.” Suno has also improperly obtained song lyrics to train its models by “scraping” full-text lyric files from various online platforms, including Genius, AZLyrics, Lyrics.com and other similar sites. Through these unlawful methods, the plaintiffs allege, Suno has been able to train its AI models to replicate human-made music that is catered to the specific style, lyrical subject, and other specific preferences of any user—all without any attribution, license fees or royalties paid to the artists whose music was used to create it.

Unlike similar lawsuits filed in other states, the Woulard Action not only seeks to hold Suno liable for violations of federal copyright laws, but it also alleges that Suno has violated the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) and related Illinois laws. Among other things, BIPA prohibits private entities from collecting, capturing, purchasing or otherwise obtaining a person’s biometric identifier—which includes a person’s voiceprint—without the person’s written consent. See 740 ILCS 14/15(b). BIPA also prohibits private entities from selling, leasing, trading or “otherwise profit[ing]” from a person’s biometric identifier. 740 ILCS 14/15(c). The Woulard Action plaintiffs allege that their recorded music consists of each of their own distinctive vocal tags, which are subject to the protections of BIPA. Accordingly, Suno’s collection, capture, copying and storage of the plaintiffs’ unique voice tags to compile its AI training datasets without the plaintiffs’ informed, written consent constitute violations of BIPA.

Suno has moved to dismiss the Woulard Action, and the court has not yet ruled on the motion. It therefore remains to be seen whether federal courts will extend the protections of BIPA to artists and musicians whose voices are used to create machine-generated music. The lawsuit—and others like it—also raises important questions about how to balance innovation with the need for artists to be fairly recognized and compensated for their work. Unlike similar actions currently pending, the Woulard Action plaintiffs are largely independent musicians and songwriters who face particularly severe and unfair harm in the age of AI, making the case one to watch for independent artists everywhere.