Universal Music Group has filed a lawsuit in the United States against DistroKid, the world’s largest music distributor by volume, accusing the company of deceptive trade practices and copyright infringement linked to artificial intelligence (AI)-generated music.
The complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, alleges that DistroKid has “engaged in both deceptive trade practices and blatant copyright infringement.” UMG, the world’s largest music rights company, says the case is “not about the distribution of AI-generated music when clearly disclosed as such,” but about DistroKid allegedly “masquerading as something it is not and benefiting from that false impression.”
Allegations of AI ‘slop’ and infringement#
In the suit, UMG claims DistroKid misleads the market by giving the false impression that the music it distributes consists of artist-backed releases created and owned by real human artists, that it supports digital services’ policies and the Music Fights Fraud Alliance’s initiatives against AI “slop,” and that it takes a stance against copyright infringement.
“In reality, DistroKid embraces all of this bad-actor conduct; doing so benefits its growth and corresponding market valuation. The ramifications are felt by legitimate players in the music industry, including artists, consumers, and Plaintiffs.”
UMG adds that DistroKid is “flooding platforms with AI-generated ‘slop’ that siphons revenue and listeners from legitimate artists and rightsholders,” and that it “proliferates infringing tracks across platforms” even when it knows the tracks infringe rights.
DistroKid says it distributes roughly 40% of all new music in the world for more than 4 million artists. In July, private equity firm CVC Capital Partners agreed a ten-figure deal to majority-acquire DistroKid, brokered by Goldman Sachs and Raine Group. The companies said the transaction was expected to close in Q3 2026.
Damages and scope#
The suit seeks maximum statutory damages of $150,000 per work infringed. UMG’s exhibits name 1,000 specific recordings, a theoretical maximum of $150 million in damages. The complaint calls those 1,000 tracks “the tip of the iceberg.”
“DistroKid has infringed and continues to infringe thousands of Plaintiffs’ sound recordings, and discovery will likely show thousands (or more) additional infringing works.”
UMG says DistroKid’s “illegal, deceptive, and unlawful practices” have fueled its rapid growth while threatening legitimate players in the music economy. The suit argues that every stream captured by a deceptive AI-generated or infringing track diverts listeners and revenue away from real artists, misleads consumers, and makes digital services believe they are featuring genuine music.
UMG also claims DistroKid gains an unfair competitive advantage because other companies bear the costs of ensuring only authentic, legitimately owned music reaches digital services, while DistroKid does not do that work.
“Time and again, DistroKid concedes that it does not have rights in the sound recording. Here is where it gets egregious: after acknowledging that it does not have rights in the track, DistroKid continues to distribute that exact same recording to other Digital Services.”
Separate data shows that of 1,551 AI music tracks submitted to SIQA’s charts in the first quarter of this year, 90.4% were made using Suno, and 75.8% were distributed by DistroKid.
Previous lawsuit against Believe#
This is not the first time Universal has sued a large do-it-yourself (DIY) music distribution company. In November 2024, UMG, alongside ABKCO Music & Records and Concord Music Group, sued Believe and its DIY distribution subsidiary TuneCore in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking damages of at least $500 million.
That complaint alleged Believe had built its business through “industrial-scale copyright infringement,” centering on sped-up and remixed versions of copyrighted recordings. Believe said at the time that it “strongly refuted” the claims. The two sides settled in April 2026, filing a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice.
