First-order effects

• Suno must defend a broader complaint that now includes allegations of circumventing YouTube’s copying protections and violating the DMCA, alongside the original copyright claims.
• The RIAA gains an additional asserted theory for challenging how Suno obtained music used in its service; these remain allegations, not findings.

Second-order effects

• The amendment puts greater pressure on AI music developers to document both the source of training material and the technical means used to access it, not only their fair-use rationale.
• It may give music rightsholders a more direct litigation framework for disputes involving music sourced from streaming platforms, where proof of copying and access controls becomes central.

Third-order effects

• If courts engage with these claims, AI-training litigation could increasingly turn on data-acquisition practices as well as the legality of model training itself.
• The dispute points toward a more contested boundary between platform access controls, copyright enforcement, and AI development, though the eventual standard will depend on the case’s outcome.