Copyright
in
AI songs?
Copyright
in
AI songs?
of
When does a song lyric enjoy copyright protection even though the accompanying music was written by an AI? How do you prove that you wrote the lyrics yourself – and not the AI? And is an affidavit sufficient?
What is it all about?
A woman wrote a personal song lyric in spring 2025. Her partner set it to music using the AI music system SunoAI and published the result on a music platform. A short time later, a well-known artist took the lyrics – with some verbatim adaptations – and published her own version via a major digital distributor on Spotify and other streaming services.
The author of the original text defended herself with an urgent application. The Frankfurt Regional Court ruled in her favor and prohibited further distribution of the artist’s song. At the heart of the dispute was the fact that the lyrics were written by a human, but the music was written by an AI. Does copyright protect such a mixed work?
What did the court decide?
The Regional Court of Frankfurt a.M. confirmed with Judgment of 17.12.2025 – Ref. 2-06 O 401/25 copyright protection for the lyrics, even though the music was created using AI. According to the court, the lyrics and the music must be considered separately. Even if they are combined in a song, the lyrics remain protectable as an independent linguistic work. Specifically, the court clarified the following:
Text written by humans is protected
A song text demonstrably written by a human does not lose its copyright protection because the accompanying music comes from an AI. The lyrics are an independent linguistic work that can be used independently of the background music. Even a simple, short refrain can be protected by copyright. The requirements for the so-called level of creation are low for lyrics.
AI texts generally do not enjoy any protection
At the same time, the court made it clear that a text generated entirely by an AI system is generally not eligible for protection. Copyright protection requires a personal intellectual creation that can only originate from a human being. However, the court expressly left open the question of whether a particularly cleverly formulated prompt to an AI could justify protection in itself.
New rules for the burden of proof
The question of who has to prove whether a text originates from a human or an AI is particularly relevant in practice. The court has developed a graduated approach to this:
In principle, the party claiming copyright must prove that they created the work themselves. However, if the other party provides concrete evidence that the text was created by an AI – such as an expert opinion – the author must explain in detail how the creative process took place and which parts of the work are based on human creativity.
In this case, an affidavit by the author, which was supported by her partner’s statements, was sufficient. The court did not regard the weaknesses of the text identified in the expert opinion, such as logical breaks and missing rhymes, as evidence of production by an AI, but as a possible expression of artistic freedom.
The breaks described by the music expert can also and especially occur in song lyrics and be an expression of artistic freedom.
Urgent legal protection is possible
The opposing party argued that summary proceedings were unsuitable for AI issues, as a costly expert opinion would ultimately be required to clarify authorship. The court rejected this argument, stating that interim legal protection was intended for copyright infringements in particular. If an expert opinion were always required, urgent legal protection in copyright law would effectively be abolished.
Why was the takeover illegal?
The artist had not taken over the entire text word for word, but only essential parts. The court examined whether the originality of the original text was still recognizable despite the changes. This was affirmed. The basic structure of the text, the style with short, concise sentences and central passages of content were clearly recognizable in the artist’s song. Some of the formulations were even adopted word for word.
The addition of a chorus and the partial rewording did not lead the court out of the scope of copyright protection. In the court’s opinion, it was a so-called non-free adaptation, i.e. a takeover that remains too close to the original to be considered an independent work.
What happens to copyright when humans and AI work together?
The decision provides an initial orientation for this topic and what needs to be considered when dealing with AI systems.
- For creatives and authors:
If you write your own texts and have the music generated by an AI, you retain the copyright to the text. It is important to document your own creative contribution, for example with early drafts, notes or time stamps. - For exploiters and platforms:
Digital distributors and labels should check whether the content they are distributing is free from third-party laws. The contractual assurance of a contractual partner does not protect against a claim for injunctive relief. - For AI users:
Purely AI-generated texts are unlikely to enjoy copyright protection following this decision. Anyone wishing to invoke their copyright must be able to demonstrate which parts of the work are based on their own creative work.
Conclusion
The decision of the Regional Court of Frankfurt a. M. shows a pragmatic approach to taking mutual interests into account.
Authors who use AI, as well as those whose works could be considered as such but do not use AI, are well advised to document their own creative achievements. This will enable them to secure their copyrights in the event of a dispute.
Just because an AI has contributed to a work does not mean that the entire work is not eligible for protection. The human-created components retain their copyright protection, if such protection is applicable.
The question of where copyright begins and ends with AI-supported creations will continue to occupy the courts intensively. This judgment provides an important initial guidepost in this regard.
We are happy to
advise you about
Copyright!
