Copyright lawyer and director of international relations, Inger Elise Mey and chairman Tom Hugo Hermansen. (photo: Willy Martinsen)
The Atlantic recently published databases of millions of works used to train artificial intelligence. We brought together TONO Chairman Tom Hugo Hermansen and TONO Legal Officer and Department Director Inger Elise Mey for a conversation about copyright, technology, and what's at stake for music creators.
/ 02/07/2026 / Willy MartinsenWhen the American magazine The Atlantic recently published databases with millions of works used to train artificial intelligence, music creators around the world were able to search for their own works in the material. Among them was TONO chairman Tom Hugo Hermansen.
– All the KEiiNO works and many of my solo works are there. It's not surprising. We constantly get demos from songwriters who say: "I've made a song with Suno, it must be suitable for KEiiNO". And then it sounds like a KEiiNO song.
For copyright lawyer and director of international relations at TONO, Inger Elise Mey, the findings are a confirmation of something "everyone" knew, and which TONO has warned against for a long time.
– The case confirms what we have been saying for a long time, that the major AI models are being trained on Norwegian musical works without consent from the songwriters or permission from TONO.
TONO does not want to stop technology development. The issue is about who gets the value when music is used to build new services.
– The problem is that large tech and AI companies are making huge sums of money from exploiting our members' music without the authors getting a penny back for the use. This undermines the future value creation for our rights holders if this is to continue without any form of licensing or remuneration, says Mey.
Hermansen believes most people understand why this is perceived as problematic for music creators and rights holders:
– I find it unfair that the money for these services ends up in the pockets of some big tech giants that are often owned by venture capital companies, and is not given to the community. It is clear that it is fun to use such tools, and I am not against people creating the pink song for the confirmation using AI. The challenge is that the companies offer the service and keep all the money themselves. They do not share with the rights holders.
– If people pay 200 kroner a month for a service like that, I think most people agree that those who have created the music the service is built on should get a share of the value.
TONO refers to analyses conducted by the international umbrella organization CISAC.
– A future loss of income of almost 30 percent within three to five years has been identified for our authors and music creators if this business is allowed to continue unhindered, says Mey.
Hermansen points out that the amount of AI-generated content is already enormous and only increasing.
– Deezer says that around half of what is uploaded now is AI-generated. It dilutes the value of real lyrics and music, from people who have invested time and money to make this happen. You “flood the system” with “spam.”
One of the most important questions for TONO is how authors can enforce their rights if they do not know which works are being used.
– It is important to know what the models are actually trained on. If they are trained on KEiiNO works, the authors in KEiiNO should be compensated, says Mey.
TONO has already developed licensing principles and remuneration models for companies that wish to use TONO's repertoire as a training basis.
– We have developed new licensing principles and remuneration models that we can offer to services that want to use our repertoire as a training basis. But it is difficult to get the large AI companies to the negotiating table. We are therefore asking legislators in the EU and in Norway to come forward with clear rules of engagement that safeguard copyright.
Hermansen believes licensing must be the next step.
– Norwegian authors' works are used to train these models. Then the copyright holders must be paid. It cannot be the tech giant that gets the revenue.
Several European asset management companies have already filed lawsuits against AI companies.
– TONO is continuously considering whether to take legal action, and we are closely monitoring our sister societies in Germany and Denmark, both of which have sued Suno for copyright infringement. An important ruling will be made in Munich at the end of July that will be crucial for TONO's next steps here, says Mey.
She also emphasizes that TONO primarily wants solutions that secure the rights of authors through regulations and licensing.
– We are working with the EU and decision-makers in Norway to change the legislation, so that we hopefully do not have to go to expensive court. We cannot rule out taking legal action, but are now closely monitoring our sister societies in Germany and Denmark, both of which have sued Suno for copyright infringement. An important ruling will be made in Munich at the end of July, which will be important in determining TONO's next steps.
– What exactly is it that makes these tech companies just run around without respect for normal copyright and licensing with collective management organizations?
– There are different legal rules in the US and Europe in the area of copyright. The large American AI companies are trying to hide behind an older doctrine of 'fair use' in the US. This rule does not apply in Europe. TONO is now asking the EU to show strength, so that we prevent our creators from being subjected to a system that completely undermines their rights, explains Mey.
Both Hermansen and Mey emphasize that they do not want to stop the development of artificial intelligence.
– No, we should not stand in the way of technological development, says Hermansen. – Being able to use the value bank we have to create new works is perfectly fine, as long as the person who has helped develop the original is credited, has given consent and has a real opportunity to say no.
Mey believes the challenge for the authorities is to find the balance between innovation and the protection of culture.
– The EU wants to facilitate innovation and development, but at the same time understands that they must protect fundamental intellectual property rights to art and culture. It can be experienced as a difficult balancing act, but intellectual property rights are the very key to both innovation and further development. Protecting culture and competing on technology are not contradictory. It is about sharing value creation a little more fairly.
Some minor linguistic improvements were made to the text on July 2, at 5:13 PM.
Related issue: