AI music platform Suno has killed an advertisement featuring Mary J. Blige after discovering the singer never signed off on it and was uncomfortable with the campaign.
“We entered into a business deal with someone who presented themselves as Ms. Blige’s official representative. As soon as we learned this was not the case, and that Ms. Blige was uncomfortable, we terminated the advertising campaign,” a Suno spokesperson told Variety.
The 85-second ad had circulated online last month, showing Blige in a studio watching an unnamed producer generate a song called “Pretty Flowers” that closely resembled her own musical style. In the video, Blige asks the producer to add strings and a beat, then watches as the AI-generated track comes together in seconds, calling the process “amazing” and “dope.”
The problem: Blige had reportedly never authorized any of it. The agreement that put her image and apparent endorsement in front of the public was struck with someone who did not actually have the authority to make that deal on her behalf.
The backlash was swift once the ad went public, and it has since been pulled from social media platforms.
Suno’s spokesperson insisted the company’s intentions were genuine. “Ms. Blige is an icon who we all deeply admire. Ever since she broke onto the scene with ‘What’s the 411,’ ‘No More Drama,’ ‘The Breakthrough,’ ‘Growing Pains,’ etc., she hasn’t stopped innovating. That’s why we wanted to work with her,” the spokesperson said.
A Pattern of Legal Trouble
This episode adds to a growing list of conflicts between Suno and the music industry. In 2024, major labels Sony Music, Universal Music Group, and Warner Records sued Suno and rival AI platform Udio, accusing both companies of exploiting musicians’ recorded work without permission.
Suno also faces a separate lawsuit from GEMA, Germany’s royalty collection society, which alleges the platform generated music that mimics songs including Lou Bega’s “Mambo No. 5” and Alphaville’s “Forever Young.” Last month, a German court ruled that Suno had violated both U.S. and German copyright laws.
The Blige incident raises a separate but related question: how a company can run a national ad campaign built around a celebrity’s likeness and reputation without first confirming who actually has the right to speak for that person.
