Midjourney seeks disclosure of Hollywood studios' AI usage in copyright dispute

AI startup Midjourney is seeking to compel three Hollywood studios to reveal how they use AI themselves as part of an ongoing legal dispute. Disney and Universal sued Midjourney for alleged copyright infringement last year, noting that the startup's image-generation models could create images of characters, such as Bart Simpson and Darth Vader, who are owned by the studios. A few months later, Warner Bros.

sued Midjourney as well. The startup argues that training its AI models on images of copyrighted characters is permitted under fair use. The current dispute revolves around the documentation the studios will need to produce during the discovery process.

A judge previously ruled that the studios would indeed have to provide information about their generative AI usage – but only when it led to “consumer-facing” videos and images. Midjourney seeks to overturn that limitation, arguing that it “unfairly” allows the studios “to cherry-pick only those documents they believe support their market harm claims while depriving Midjourney of documents that would support its defenses.” The startup claims that the “documents [the studios] are withholding are precisely those that would reveal whether, behind closed doors, they are doing exactly what they are suing Midjourney for doing.” For example, the startup says that if the studios are developing image-generating AI models “for internal use in storyboarding or ideating content for film or TV, that evidence would equally demonstrate that it is an industry custom, even among the studios themselves, to download and train AI on unlicensed copyrighted content.” In the filing, the startup also argues that the studios should reveal all the prompts they used in Midjourney, as well as the resulting outputs, not just the prompts that produced the allegedly infringing images. The studios' lead attorney David Singer previously claimed Midjourney was seeking this documentation as part of a “fishing expedition.” He also said the studios “do not seek to stop AI technology or even shut down Midjourney's business,” but rather “simply want Midjourney to stop copying their movies and TV shows and to stop distributing, publicly displaying, publicly performing, and creating derivative works that include copies of [their] famous characters without authorization.” Why this matters: This dispute highlights the increasing scrutiny of AI usage in the entertainment industry and the need for clearer guidelines on fair use and copyright infringement.

The outcome could have significant implications for AI developers and users, as well as for the broader industry. If Midjourney's request is granted, it could force studios to disclose their own AI usage, potentially revealing a double standard. This could lead to a re-evaluation of fair use policies and the development of more transparent AI practices.