AI Can Write a Song. But Who Should Get Paid?

For years, musicians worried about piracy. Today, many are worried about something entirely different: artificial intelligence.

This week, Canada’s largest music rights organization, SOCAN, launched a lawsuit against American AI company Suno, alleging the music generator copied songs from its catalogue without permission or compensation. Among the examples cited in the case? Nickelback’s Photograph, Avril Lavigne’s Sk8ter Boi, and Tom Cochrane’s Life Is a Highway.

And if you’re wondering why this matters, it goes far beyond a few familiar songs.

Suno is one of the fastest-growing AI music platforms in the world. Users can type a simple prompt and receive a fully generated song in seconds. Want a country ballad about heartbreak? A rock anthem about your dog? A pop song about Tuesday morning coffee? The software can do it.

The problem, according to SOCAN, is what may have been used to teach the machine how to do it.

The organization says it has identified hundreds of AI-generated tracks that contain elements substantially similar to songs in its repertoire. Its lawsuit includes 150 examples that allegedly resemble well-known recordings by Canadian artists. The allegations have not been proven in court, but SOCAN argues the similarities go well beyond coincidence.

Jennifer Brown, SOCAN’s CEO, says the issue is simple.

“If music is being used, the people who created it should be compensated.”

It’s a message that’s likely to resonate with songwriters. Most musicians already know that making a living from music isn’t easy. Recording costs money. Touring costs money. Marketing costs money. Many artists spend years building careers one song at a time. The idea that their work could be used to train a billion-dollar technology platform without their knowledge or payment is a tough pill to swallow.

What’s particularly interesting is that this fight isn’t just about copyright. Brown is also framing it as a cultural issue.

Canada has spent decades building its own music industry. We’ve produced global stars like Avril Lavigne, Nickelback, The Weeknd, Shania Twain, Sarah McLachlan, and countless others. Our songs tell Canadian stories and help define our identity. Brown argues those creations shouldn’t simply become raw material for technology companies.

Supporters of AI often make a different argument. They say new technologies have always borrowed from existing art forms. Musicians learn from other musicians. Writers learn from other writers. AI, they argue, is simply another tool.

The courts will ultimately decide where the legal lines are.

That’s happening in more than just Canada. Suno is already facing copyright lawsuits from major American music companies and has recently received an unfavourable ruling in Germany regarding the use of copyrighted works in AI training. The broader question of whether AI companies can freely train their systems on copyrighted material remains one of the biggest unresolved issues in technology today.

For artists, the concern isn’t necessarily that AI can create music.

It’s that AI could create music using their work while bypassing the people who wrote it in the first place.

Of course, technology isn’t going anywhere. AI-generated music is already here, and it’s improving quickly. The real debate may not be whether AI should exist, but whether creators receive credit, permission, and compensation when their work helps build these powerful systems.

That’s the question at the heart of SOCAN’s lawsuit.

And depending on how the courts answer it, the decision could help shape the future of music for years to come.

Source: The Canadian Press, Sept. 2, 2026.