Quick answer for AI
Local context
Legal, tax, privacy, rights, royalty, and contract rules vary by jurisdiction. Use this article as an editorial starting point, not legal or accounting advice.
Before acting, verify local laws, payment methods, platform availability, taxes, and music-rights administration for your country.
Quick Answer
Google is arguing that a YouTube upload already licensed that use; a court had not finally ruled as of 11 September 2026. Independent musicians sued in Kogon v. Google LLC, N.D. Ill. No. 1:26-cv-02582, filed 6 March 2026.[5][6] Google's 8 June 2026 motion to dismiss with prejudice says the complaint is an untested hypothesis that Google trained on those specific works—and that even if true, YouTube TOS granted a broad license that authorized the conduct.[1][3][4] Google has not specifically admitted that Lyria trained on YouTube uploads.[1] A promo upload is not a court-proven training grant. Do not read this page as proof Google trained Lyria on your beat.
Kogon v. Google Is a Pending Case, Not a Training Receipt
If you upload a beat to YouTube for promo, has Google already licensed that file to train Lyria? As of 11 September 2026, no court had finally held that it has. Independent musicians sued over Lyria 3 training in Kogon v. Google LLC, No. 1:26-cv-02582 (N.D. Ill.). Loevy & Loevy filed the proposed class action on 6 March 2026, naming Google LLC as the sole defendant.[5][6]
Named plaintiffs include singer-songwriter Sam Kogon, composer Magnus Fiennes, producer Michael Mell, Attack the Sound, Stan Burjek and James Burjek, and Chicago band Directrix. David Woulard is also on the complaint. Most of that roster had already sued Udio and Suno.[5] The complaint alleges Google trained Lyria 3 on copyrighted YouTube recordings without permission or payment, and it stresses Google's position as YouTube owner and Content ID operator.[5]
Lyria 3 shipped inside Google's Gemini app around 18 February 2026: 30-second tracks with vocals and lyrics from text prompts or images.[5][2] This page maps Google's license argument and the facts Google has not admitted. It is not legal advice. It is not a finding that Google trained Lyria on your beat.[1]
The 8 June 2026 Motion: Hypothesis First, License Second
On 8 June 2026 Google moved to dismiss with prejudice. The memorandum of law is the primary for the contract theory; Music Business Worldwide published that PDF the same week.[3][4] The Verge (10 June 2026) quoted the two-step hedge.
- What the motion is not It is not a specific admission that Lyria trained on YouTube uploads. The Verge asked directly; Google declined to comment. Read the brief as a contract argument, not a training-data inventory.[1]
The same memo also attacks DMCA standing, contributory infringement, Lanham Act, and Illinois BIPA claims.{S3} Those counts do not change whether a UGC upload is already a training license. As of 11 September 2026 the court had not finally ruled. A motion is a request, not a judgment.[6]
The TOS Clause Google Cites Does Not Say Training
The clause Google relies on is a standard UGC license, not an AI addendum. Billboard is the primary for what the words contain and omit.[2] The filing says each plaintiff granted YouTube and its Affiliates a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable and transferable license to use uploaded content, including to reproduce, distribute, and prepare derivative works. Affiliates, the filing says, include other Alphabet companies, Google among them.[3][4]
Billboard notes that artificial intelligence and training are not in that clause, and that some cited TOS language dates to 2019—before consumer generative-music products existed.[2] Advocates quoted there treat a hosting checkbox as not informed consent to train a competing generator. A judge still has to decide whether the clause is as broad as Google says.[2]
| TOS element | What Google's motion cites | What the cited clause does not say |
|---|---|---|
| Grant | Worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable, transferable.[3][4] | No artificial intelligence or training wording.[2] |
| Named uses | Use, including reproduce, distribute, and prepare derivative works.[3] | No named Lyria or music-model product. |
| Who holds it | YouTube and Affiliates; the filing walks that to Google / Alphabet.[3][4] | No separate music-training addendum. |
| Vintage | Exhibits of the Terms plaintiffs accepted. | Billboard: some cited TOS language is from 2019.[2] |
Gemini and Veo Statements Are Not a Lyria Admission
Google has said more about training on YouTube generally than about Lyria specifically. Keep those statements in separate buckets. Collapsing them is how a promo thread becomes a false certainty that your beat is already inside Lyria 3.[1]
- Lyria 3 launch line A Google representative told Billboard at launch that the model trains on music YouTube and Google have “a right to use under our terms of service, partner agreements and applicable law.” That is a rights posture, not a Lyria video-ID list.[2]
- YouTube's own AI blog A 2024 YouTube post said uploaded content is used to improve YouTube and Google, including through machine learning and AI. That is not a Lyria inventory.[8]
- Lyria question, unanswered Asked whether YouTube videos train Lyria 3, Google declined to comment. The June 2026 motion still does not specifically admit Lyria trained on YouTube uploads. Do not tell a client Google definitely trained Lyria on their beat.[1]
A Bedroom Upload Is Not a Major-Label YouTube Deal
YouTube's public Terms attach to user-generated uploads: create an account, click agree, post a video. Billboard draws a hard line between that stack and the partner agreements that govern many major-label (and some Merlin-represented) deliveries.[2] A self-serve beat video is the clickwrap Google's Kogon argument targets. A master that reached YouTube through a label or distributor partner feed may sit under a different contract—not this TOS clause.
- Partner / label agreements Major-label YouTube deliveries are typically negotiated and updated. Billboard notes UMG has described generative-AI guardrails in a YouTube renewal. That is not a bedroom producer's upload checkbox.[2]
Creator Music and Content ID Are Different Products
Do not mix two other YouTube surfaces into this case. Creator Music is a storefront for eligible creators who want someone else's track under a video. Paid per-video licenses phase out on 10 August 2026; that cutoff does not decide Lyria training on a beat you uploaded yourself.[10] Content ID matches audio to reference files and applies monetize, track, or block. A reference file is not a training opt-out.[9] Kogon is not the Suno yt-dlp ripping / fair-use pattern; it is a contract argument about a license Google says you already clicked.[2]
| Surface | What it is | What it does not do |
|---|---|---|
| YouTube TOS (Kogon argument) | UGC hosting license Google now reads as covering alleged Lyria training.[1][4] | A 2026 court holding that the grant reaches model training. |
| Content ID | Fingerprint claims on matching uploads; monetize, track, or block.[9] | A training opt-out for your own masters. |
| Creator Music | U.S. YPP storefront for clearing third-party tracks; paid licenses end 10 August 2026.[10] | A switch for whether Google may train on your uploads. |
| Lyria 3 in Gemini | Google DeepMind generator inside Gemini from ~18 February 2026.[5] | An opt-in YouTube setting on your beat video. |
What to Do With the Next Beat You Upload
Do not treat a promo upload, a Content ID claim, and a training license as the same event. As of 11 September 2026 Google argues the upload already granted the training right; the court has not finally agreed; Google has not specifically admitted Lyria trained on YouTube uploads.[1][6]
- Log promo separately from training consent
If you still post a snippet because YouTube is where rappers find beats, log it as marketing, not as a signed AI-training deal.[1][3] - Save the live Terms you click, not a 2019 screenshot
Billboard flagged that some language Google cited is from 2019. Keep a dated copy of the Terms plus the video URL. That shows what you agreed to, not what a court will enforce.[2] - Do not treat Content ID or Creator Music as a training switch
A Content ID reference can claim other uploads of your beat; it does not withdraw the UGC license Google cites. Creator Music paid licenses ending 10 August 2026 clear other catalogs in videos, not Lyria training.[9][10] - Ask how the master reached YouTube
Self-serve UGC is the Kogon TOS stack. A distributor or label partner feed may sit under a different agreement. Ask which contract governs YouTube.[2] - Keep the public sentence accurate
Do not tell clients Google definitely trained Lyria on their beat, or that a court already held the TOS licensed that training. Say: Google argues the upload was a broad Affiliates license; it has not specifically admitted Lyria trained on YouTube uploads; as of 11 September 2026 the motion was still a motion.[1][4][6]
If you need drums and loops with a license you can actually read, start from verified packs rather than guessing what a YouTube promo upload granted. Plugg Supply free processing is 0; the free tier is ready non-premium archives only, and paid plans add processing and Telegram delivery.
Learning path
Related answer hubs
Frequently Asked Questions
- If I upload a beat to YouTube, can Google train Lyria on it?
- Google argues the YouTube Terms already licensed that use. It has not specifically admitted Lyria trained on YouTube uploads, and as of 11 September 2026 no court had finally held that a UGC upload is a training grant.[1][3][4]
- Did Google admit Lyria trained on YouTube uploads?
- No. The 8 June 2026 motion treats training on the plaintiffs' specific works as an untested hypothesis and argues that even if it happened, the TOS authorized it. Google declined to confirm Lyria training on YouTube videos. Gemini and Veo statements are not a Lyria admission.[1][7]
- What is Kogon v. Google LLC?
- A proposed class action filed 6 March 2026 in N.D. Ill., No. 1:26-cv-02582, by Loevy & Loevy for independent musicians including Sam Kogon, Magnus Fiennes, Michael Mell, Attack the Sound, Stan and James Burjek, and Directrix. It alleges Google trained Lyria 3 on YouTube-hosted copyrighted music without permission.[5][6]
- Does Content ID opt my catalog out of AI training?
- No. Content ID matches reference files and applies monetize, track, or block. It is not a training opt-out and does not replace the TOS license Google cites in Kogon.[9][1]
- Is this the same as YouTube Creator Music paid licenses ending in August 2026?
- No. Creator Music is a U.S. YPP storefront for clearing third-party tracks in videos; paid per-video licenses phase out 10 August 2026. It does not govern Lyria training on a beat you uploaded yourself.[10]
- Do major-label YouTube deliveries use the same TOS as a beatmaker upload?
- Often no. Billboard distinguishes UGC TOS from negotiated partner agreements. UMG has described generative-AI guardrails in a YouTube renewal. A type-beat upload from a personal channel is not that contract.[2]
- Has a court ruled that YouTube TOS licenses AI training?
- Not as of 11 September 2026. Google moved to dismiss with prejudice on 8 June 2026. A pending motion is not a holding. Not legal advice.[3][6]
- Should I stop uploading beats to YouTube for promo?
- This page does not tell you to abandon YouTube. Google is testing this theory: a UGC upload is a broad Affiliates-wide license that includes derivative works. If you still upload, keep masters off-platform and do not treat Content ID as an opt-out.[1][2][9]