According to the case materials, the developers used musical compositions to train algorithms without obtaining prior consent from the authors and without paying them compensation. The lawsuit was prompted by complaints from musicians and other rights holders who noticed similarities between the content generated by the platform and their works. During the proceedings, experts concluded that the algorithms are capable of memorizing distinct characteristic elements of original compositions. In some cases, when creating music based on text prompts, the neural network reproduced recognizable fragments and structures of existing works. Representatives of the platform rejected the accusations. They argued that the system only analyzes general patterns, musical genres, and styles, and that the responsibility for the content created should primarily rest with the users of the service. The court disagreed with these arguments. According to the ruling, the company developing the algorithms bears responsibility, as it determines which data is used to train the neural network and how the system functions. The decision could be significant for the future regulation of generative artificial intelligence in Europe. Experts believe that developers of such services will need to pay closer attention to the origin of the data used to train models and also enter into licensing agreements with authors and rights holders. Disputes over the use of copyrighted works for training artificial intelligence have become increasingly relevant in recent years as services capable of creating music, images, texts, and videos continue to develop.