Suno, an AI music platform, asserts a firm stance against the use of copyrighted materials. Users are allowed to upload their own music creations for remixing or to pair their original lyrics with AI-generated compositions. In theory, the platform is designed to detect and block attempts to use copyrighted songs and lyrics. However, it appears that Suno’s copyright detection mechanisms are surprisingly easy to circumvent.

With just a bit of creativity and some readily available software, users can generate AI-produced replicas of well-known tracks like Beyoncé’s “Freedom,” Black Sabbath’s “Paranoid,” and Aqua’s “Barbie Girl.” While the differences might be noticeable to a discerning ear, these versions could pass as alternate versions or unreleased tracks during a casual listen. There’s also a risk that these near-duplicates could be monetized by being uploaded to streaming platforms. Suno has chosen not to comment on this issue.

To create these covers, users must utilize Suno Studio, which is accessible through the company’s Premier Plan, costing $24 monthly. Instead of generating a song from scratch using text prompts, Suno Studio allows users to upload a track to modify or cover. Popular songs typically get flagged and rejected unless altered; using basic tools like Audacity to adjust the speed or adding white noise can often evade detection. Once edited, the song can be restored to its original speed in Suno Studio, transforming copyrighted material into a basis for new AI-generated music.

When a cover is generated without applying style transfers, Suno tends to recreate the original instrumental arrangement with minor variations in sound, particularly when using model 4.5 or 4.5+. Model v5, however, is more adventurous, infusing elements like chugging guitars and energetic piano into tracks such as “Freedom,” and reimagining the Dead Kennedys’ “California Über Alles” with a lively fiddle twist.

Suno also provides a feature for adding vocals by either generating lyrics or manually entering them. The platform is supposed to block copyrighted lyrics, and direct copies from lyric sites like Genius will result in nonsensical outputs. Yet, even slight alterations can slip through the filters.

By making minor adjustments to the lyrics of “Freedom,” such as changing “rain on this bitter love” to “reign on” and “tell the sweet I’m new” to “tell the suite,” Suno Studio can be deceived. Beyond the initial verse and chorus, further changes were unnecessary. The generated voice closely resembles the original, producing slightly off-brand versions of artists like Ozzy or Beyoncé.

Indie artists might not even be afforded that level of protection. One of my own songs cleared the copyright filter while I was testing v5 of the company’s model. I was also able to get tracks by singer-songwriter Matt Wilson, Charles Bissell’s “Car Colors,” and experimental artist Claire Rousay by Suno’s copyright detection system without any changes at all. Artists on smaller labels or self-distributing through Bandcamp or services like DistroKid are most likely to slip through the cracks; DistroKid and CD Baby declined to comment.

The results of these AI covers fall firmly in the uncanny valley. The songs they’re covering are unmistakable: the riff from “Paranoid” remains identifiable and “Freedom” is obviously “Freedom” from the moment the marching snare hits kick in. But there is a lifelessness to them. Even if AI Ozzy is alarmingly accurate-sounding, it lacks nuance and dynamics, leading it to feel like an imitation of a human, rather than the real thing.

The instrumentals similarly discard any interesting artistic choices the originals make, or clone them in flat imitations. A non-jig “California Über Alles” cover has most of its rough edges sanded down so it sounds like a wedding band version of the original. Pink Floyd’s “Another Brick in the Wall” goes from an experiment in doom disco to just vacuous dancefloor filler. And, while it kind of nails David Gilmour’s guitar tone, it does away with any sense of phrasing or progression, turning the solo into just a mindless stream of notes.

Creating unauthorized covers violates both the stated purpose of Suno, and the terms of service. Moreover, Suno only appears to scan tracks on upload; it doesn’t seem to recheck outputs for potential infringement, or rescan tracks before exporting them. The path to monetizing Suno-created covers is simple from there. AI slopmongers could upload them through a distribution service like DistroKid and profit from other people’s songs without paying the typical royalties a cover would give the original composer. And independent artists seem to be the most vulnerable.

Folk artist Murphy Campbell discovered this recently when someone uploaded what seem to be AI covers of songs she posted on YouTube to her Spotify profile. (It’s not clear what system they were generated through.) Shortly afterwards, distributor Vydia filed copyright claims against her YouTube videos and began collecting royalties on them. And to highlight just how broken the whole system is, the songs which Vydia successfully filed copyright claims for are all in the public domain. Spotify eventually removed the AI covers, and Vydia has rescinded its copyright claims, but that only happened following a social media campaign by Campbell. Vydia says the two incidents are separate and it is not associated with the AI covers of Campbell’s work.

AI fakes are a problem for other artists too. Experimental composer William Basinski and indie rock group King Gizzard and The Lizard Wizard have had imitations slip through multiple filters and reach streaming platforms like Spotify. Sometimes, these fake songs can siphon up views straight from the artist’s own page. In a system where payouts can already be brutally low — Spotify requires a minimum of 1,000 streams to get paid — less famous musicians are hit hardest.

Services like Deezer, Qobuz, and Spotify have taken measures to combat spammy AI and impersonators. Spotify spokesperson Chris Macowski told The Verge that the company “takes protecting artists’ rights seriously, and approaches it from multiple angles. That includes safeguards to help prevent unauthorized content from being uploaded in the first place, along with systems that can identify duplicate or highly similar tracks. Those systems are backed by human review to make sure we’re getting it right.” But no system is perfect, and keeping up with a flood of AI slop enabled by platforms like Suno poses a challenge.

Macowski acknowledged the technical difficulties involved, saying, “It’s an area we’re continuing to invest in and evolve, especially as new technologies emerge.”

Suno is only one cog in a clearly broken system. But it’s one artists have particularly little recourse to fight. Bands can contact Spotify and have AI fakes removed from their profile. It’s harder to tell how those fakes are generated, and if they’re the result of Suno’s filters failing. And so far, Suno’s response is silence.