The Munich Regional Court (Landgericht) is a first-instance civil court. Let's wait for what the higher levels have to say (if Suno cares at all about Germany or Europe).
I wonder what the 'stupid EU law' is in this case. EU allows to use copyrighted materials for data mining. This in theory created a more stable legal basis than 'fair use'. Now a court ruled on its limits. In the US there were similar law suits on using copyrighted work for training. I guess the state of copyright is complicated these days. Germany's economy might fold for other reasons but not because of court rulings that might create a stable legal framework.
Argument works for any regulation and creates a race to the bottom. Let's against with cars, Australia made a law saying that you can't sell a lawnmower with a seat duct taped on top as a car.
1. Australia banned LWASDTOT
2. Australian companies forced to use more expensive actual cars
3. USA, Chinese, Indian, etc... companies will sell LWASDTOT
4. Australian companies couldn't compete and folded
5. Major job loss in Australia
Etc...
Also works against India banning scam call centers, Russia banning cybercrime, and so on. Heck, hacking is already banned in the USA, think about how many more jobs they could have if that wasn't the case!
Bad strawman, worse reasoning. Obviously if the benefits of the regulation outweigh the cost then it's worth it.
In this case the vast majority of the benefit accrues to non-germans (because the German population is small and few Germans profit from copyrighted music) but the loss will accrue only to Germans (since they can't use Suno).
The Munich Regional Court (Landgericht) is a first-instance civil court. Let's wait for what the higher levels have to say (if Suno cares at all about Germany or Europe).
Basicaly this will happen:
1) Germany bans SUNO.
2) German companies will be forced to use expensive audio/musicians + longer iteration times.
3) USA, Chinese, Indian etc... companies will use SUNO.
4) Germany companies won't be able to compete and will fold.
5) Major job loss in Germany.
6) EU politicians will, as always, misdiagnose the problem and say that "Europenas need to work more".
7) EU will create more stupid laws.
8) Go to 1)
I wonder what the 'stupid EU law' is in this case. EU allows to use copyrighted materials for data mining. This in theory created a more stable legal basis than 'fair use'. Now a court ruled on its limits. In the US there were similar law suits on using copyrighted work for training. I guess the state of copyright is complicated these days. Germany's economy might fold for other reasons but not because of court rulings that might create a stable legal framework.
Argument works for any regulation and creates a race to the bottom. Let's against with cars, Australia made a law saying that you can't sell a lawnmower with a seat duct taped on top as a car.
1. Australia banned LWASDTOT
2. Australian companies forced to use more expensive actual cars
3. USA, Chinese, Indian, etc... companies will sell LWASDTOT
4. Australian companies couldn't compete and folded
5. Major job loss in Australia
Etc...
Also works against India banning scam call centers, Russia banning cybercrime, and so on. Heck, hacking is already banned in the USA, think about how many more jobs they could have if that wasn't the case!
Bad strawman, worse reasoning. Obviously if the benefits of the regulation outweigh the cost then it's worth it.
In this case the vast majority of the benefit accrues to non-germans (because the German population is small and few Germans profit from copyrighted music) but the loss will accrue only to Germans (since they can't use Suno).