Reservoir has launched two federal lawsuits against artificial intelligence companies Suno and Anthropic, accusing the businesses of using copyrighted music associated with Madonna, Johnny Cash, Joni Mitchell and other artists to train AI models without permission or payment.

The independent music publisher filed the cases on Wednesday, Oct. 21. It alleges that both companies copied protected songs to build technology capable of generating new music, creating business models based on what Reservoir describes as copyright infringement on an unprecedented scale.

Reservoir’s complaints argue that the alleged copying was not simply a technical step in developing AI. The publisher claims the resulting platforms were designed to deliver AI-generated alternatives to the musicians whose work helped train the models — ultimately seeking to “replace the artists.”

Iconic songs named in the cases

Among the works identified in the litigation are Joni Mitchell’s “Big Yellow Taxi,” Johnny Cash’s “Ring of Fire” and Madonna’s “Papa Don’t Preach.” The complaints also cite music by Glenn Miller, Kings of Leon and Evanescence.

Reservoir attorney Richard Busch alleges that Suno copied millions of copyrighted musical works, including songs controlled by the publisher, before offering users the ability to generate complete tracks through a platform available for $10 per month.

“Suno made illicit copies of millions of copyrighted musical works, including Reservoir’s Works, and then— without any remuneration to the rights holders — created a platform where anyone capable of paying $10 per month can create complete songs based entirely on these illicit copies,” Busch wrote in the lawsuits, which were obtained and first reported by Billboard.

The publisher further alleges that Suno was “never meant to be a tool for artists to create music,” but was instead intended to reach listeners with AI-generated substitutes that copy original works.

A widening fight over AI training

The new cases arrive amid a larger, unresolved conflict over how AI companies train their systems. Such businesses use millions of existing works to develop models capable of producing new material, a practice that has prompted litigation from authors, visual artists, movie studios and record labels.

AI companies maintain that training transforms those works into something new and therefore qualifies as legal fair use. Human creators and rights holders dispute that position. The legal outcome could determine billions in potential damages and licensing payments.

Suno has already faced lawsuits from major music companies, smaller publishers including Round Hill Music, and groups of individual musicians. Anthropic, the company behind Claude, has also been sued across multiple industries and remains involved in cases brought by music businesses.

The industry’s dealings with Suno have not followed a single path. Warner Music Group settled its case against the AI company last year, and Suno later reached similar agreements with BMG and Believe.

Earlier this year, Suno introduced a new model that it characterized as a “partnership” with the music business. Universal Music Group and Sony Music have not been persuaded by that shift, however. Both continue to pursue federal litigation and contend that the newer model remains illegal.

Reservoir has now adopted a similarly critical position. Its complaint attacks Suno’s recent “about-face” and “sudden willingness” to engage with the music industry, portraying those efforts as coming only after the company had established its business.

“Suno’s business model was admittedly and clearly: infringe now, make billions by being the first mover, and try to settle on the cheap later,” Busch wrote. “Seeking forgiveness is clearly more profitable than permission, which they obviously could have done but consciously chose not to do.”

Representatives for Suno and Anthropic did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Thursday.

ShowBiz Take

Reservoir’s twin lawsuits underscore how the AI copyright battle is expanding across both music-generation platforms and broader AI companies. The complaints also sharpen the stakes by naming instantly recognizable songs and arguing that the issue extends beyond unpaid training material to the potential creation of substitutes for the original artists.

At the same time, Suno’s settlements with Warner Music Group, BMG and Believe show that litigation and commercial agreements are developing in parallel. Reservoir’s action, alongside the continuing cases from Universal Music Group and Sony Music, makes clear that Suno’s recent outreach has not resolved the central dispute.

The decisive question remains unsettled: whether training AI systems on copyrighted works without authorization is protected as fair use or constitutes infringement requiring damages and licenses. Reservoir’s new cases place its catalog — and songs including “Big Yellow Taxi,” “Ring of Fire” and “Papa Don’t Preach” — directly inside that legal fight.