\t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n
\t\t\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n \n\tThe deal inked by Jones \u2014 a multimillion-dollar agreement signed by ex-Interscope exec Neil Jacobson\u2019s indie music company Hallwood Media \u2014 marks the latest advance of AI into every corner of American life. But the buzz surrounding the deal, which some of the major labels ultimately backed away from, highlights the legal limbo that music companies and creators face as they adopt the new tech.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tCreators like Jones can secure intellectual property protection on the lyrics and music they write themselves, but that protection depends on the extent to which AI is used in the process \u2014 and to what extent they disclose that.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tEarlier this year, the U.S. Copyright Office issued a major report<\/a> that said using AI as an \u201cassistive tool\u201d for human expression would be fair game, but that copyrights would not be granted where \u201cexpressive elements are determined by a machine.\u201d But where does that dividing line sit for any particular song? The report said it needs to be decided on a \u201ccase-by-case\u201d basis.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tIf a work isn\u2019t copyrighted, there\u2019s no recourse for anyone to be able to protect it in the marketplace, including through takedown requests against others who upload versions to streaming services and attempt to monetize them. There is also a question as to who would be able to collect any royalties from the digital exploitation of such a song, if the question of ownership is unsettled.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tSources tell Billboard that Xania Monet is confident she owns the rights to both her master recordings and musical compositions, given the amount of human input used to create her music as well as the lyrics. Hallwood Media did not return a request for comment.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tLegal experts say such AI-assisted music raises tricky questions. The lyrics penned by Jones are obviously hers, but her manager says she used a combination of Suno\u2019s model and other live\u00a0elements to create the music. But that raises a key question: How much human contribution does it take to establish copyrights on an entire song? \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\t\u201cThis strikes me as the central question, and one without a clear answer,\u201d says Kristelia Garc\u00eda, a legal scholar at Georgetown University Law Center who testified before Congress last year on this exact issue. <\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t\t \t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n \n\tSuno\u2019s involvement is less complex. Under its terms of service<\/a>, subscribers of Suno\u2019s premium tiers are given control given full control of songs they create. Such users \u201cown the songs\u201d and \u201cretain the rights to commercial use,\u201d Suno says<\/a>, \u201ceven if you end your subscription.\u201d And in meetings with prospective labels this month, Monet told executives that she owned her recordings as a Suno subscriber, sources say, and she\u2019s been shopping for a publishing partner separately. \u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tA rep for Suno did not immediately return a request for comment on Monet\u2019s deal.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tComplicating matters further is the unresolved legality of platforms like Suno themselves. Don\u2019t forget: Some labels backed away from offering Monet a deal partly because they\u2019re currently suing Suno \u2014 a case that\u2019s part of a trillion-dollar legal battle over whether it\u2019s legal to use vast troves of copyrighted works to create AI platforms.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tIn the case against Suno<\/a>, the labels claimed the company had illegally used existing songs on an \u201cunimaginable scale,\u201d in the process \u201ctrampling the rights of copyright owners.\u201d Suno has fired back<\/a> that it merely analyzes public data to \u201cenable people to make their own new creations\u201d \u2014 something it says is clearly protected as a \u201cfair use\u201d of copyrighted works.\u00a0<\/p>\n \n\tUntil those cases are definitively resolved \u2014\u00a0a process that could take years \u2014\u00a0they\u2019ll pose another level of uncertainty for any company that might otherwise strike deals for AI music. Why ink a deal with an artist whose music is reliant on a service you\u2019re actively suing, and one that might later turn out to be illegal?\u00a0<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\tRelated\t\t<\/p>\n![\"Xania](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/1758233047_52_xania-monet-credit-talisha-jones-billboard-1800.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"Suno,](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/suno-udio-ai-lawsuit-illo-2024-billboard-Andrei-Cojocaru-pro-1260.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
![\"Suno,](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/sunio-udio-ai-lawsuit-art-2024-billboard-pro-1260.jpg\")
<\/p>\n