Midjourney wants Hollywood studios to reveal the details of their AI usage

The intersection of artificial intelligence and creative industries is a complex and often contentious space, and a major legal battle is currently unfolding that could set significant precedents. AI image generation company Midjourney is embroiled in an ongoing copyright infringement lawsuit with some of Hollywood's biggest players: Disney, NBCUniversal, and Warner Bros. Discovery. But Midjourney isn't just defending itself; it's going on the offensive, demanding that these studios reveal the full extent of their own AI usage.

Hollywood Takes On AI: The Copyright Infringement Lawsuit

The legal saga began in June 2025 when Disney and Universal/DreamWorks filed lawsuits against Midjourney, alleging mass copyright infringement. Warner Bros. Discovery joined the legal offensive in September 2025. The core of the studios' complaints centers on the accusation that Midjourney used their extensive libraries of copyrighted characters and intellectual property to train its generative AI models without permission. They argue that Midjourney's service can reliably generate high-quality, unauthorized images of iconic characters like Superman, Batman, Minions, and various Marvel and Star Wars figures, directly infringing on their valuable intellectual property.

The studios are seeking injunctive relief, which could potentially force Midjourney to implement copyright protections or even temporarily shut down its service if granted by the court. Their argument is clear: "Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing." This lawsuit marks a significant escalation, being the first time major Hollywood studios have sued AI companies over such issues.

Midjourney's Counter-Move: Demanding Transparency

In response to these allegations, Midjourney is mounting a defense built on two key pillars: "fair use" and the legal doctrine of "unclean hands." Midjourney contends that training AI models on publicly available images falls under the umbrella of fair use under U.S. copyright law. Crucially, the company is arguing that the studios themselves likely engage in similar AI training practices, potentially using copyrighted material without explicit licensing, thereby weakening their claims against Midjourney.

To support this defense, Midjourney has filed a motion seeking expanded discovery, aiming to compel Disney, NBCUniversal, and Warner Bros. Discovery to disclose the intricate details of their own AI usage. Specifically, Midjourney is asking for a treasure trove of internal documents, including:

• AI business plans
• Research reports
• Training datasets
• Model weights
• Presentations about AI used for board meetings

Midjourney's attorney, Bobby Ghajar, emphasized the strategic importance of this information, stating, "If Plaintiffs are doing the very thing they seek to punish, that evidence goes to the heart of Midjourney's fair use and unclean hands defenses." The "unclean hands" doctrine essentially argues that a plaintiff cannot seek equitable relief if they themselves have engaged in improper conduct related to the subject matter of the lawsuit.

The Judicial Hurdle

This demand for transparency, however, has faced an initial roadblock. In mid-June 2026, a magistrate judge issued a ruling that limited the scope of discovery, allowing the studios to withhold most information regarding their internal AI use. The judge's order stipulated that only information related to "consumer-facing" AI applications needed to be handed over. This means Midjourney could examine the studios' public-facing AI products but not the internal research, experimental models, or training pipelines that might reveal if these companies are indeed quietly using similar training data practices.

Undeterred, Midjourney is now appealing this decision, asking the federal court to overturn the magistrate judge's order. The outcome of this appeal will be critical, as it will determine how much insight Midjourney gains into Hollywood's own AI strategies and could significantly impact the direction of the overall lawsuit.

Midjourney: An Independent AI Powerhouse

Midjourney, Inc. is an American artificial intelligence company founded in San Francisco, California, in 2021 by David Holz, who previously co-founded Leap Motion. The company describes itself as an "independent research lab" focused on developing generative AI programs. Its flagship product, the Midjourney image generation model, entered open beta on July 12, 2022. This tool allows users to create images from natural language descriptions, known as prompts, similar to other popular AI models like OpenAI's DALL-E and Stability AI's Stable Diffusion. The company quickly found success, becoming profitable just six months after its launch, as reported by Holz in August 2022.

Midjourney primarily operates through a Discord server, which had over 21 million registered users by May 2025, making it the largest community on Discord. In August 2024, Midjourney also introduced a web interface alongside the release of Midjourney version 6.1, integrating tools for image editing, panning, zooming, and inpainting. This expansion aims to make the tool more accessible beyond its initial Discord reliance.

The Broader Industry Implications: AI in Hollywood

This lawsuit is not happening in a vacuum; it's part of a much larger and heated debate about the role of AI in creative industries. Hollywood, in particular, has been grappling with the rapid advancements of AI, which pose both opportunities and significant threats to established practices and livelihoods. The recent strikes by the Writers Guild of America (WGA) and SAG-AFTRA (Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) brought these concerns to the forefront.

Both unions raised alarms about studios potentially using generative AI to write scripts, create digital replicas of actors, or reuse performances without fair compensation or consent, effectively cutting down on human labor to maximize profits. The WGA's concerns highlighted the potential for AI to diminish writers' roles, with studios generating script drafts via AI and then hiring writers only for revisions, which are typically paid less. SAG-AFTRA specifically pushed for "informed consent and fair compensation when a 'digital replica' is made, or a performance is changed using AI." While agreements were reached that include safeguards and compensation models for AI usage, the underlying tension about AI's impact on creative work remains.

Midjourney's demand for transparency from the studios taps directly into this sentiment. If it can demonstrate that the very entities suing it for copyright infringement are also leveraging AI in ways that might be legally ambiguous or ethically questionable, it could dramatically shift the narrative and the legal landscape. This case could establish a critical precedent for what constitutes "fair use" in the context of AI training data and what level of transparency AI companies can demand from traditional content creators who also use AI.

The Evolving Legal Landscape of Generative AI

The legal challenges facing generative AI are numerous and complex. Beyond this Midjourney case, other prominent lawsuits include artists suing Stability AI, Midjourney, and DeviantArt (Sarah Andersen, et al. v. Stability AI Ltd., et al.), alleging widespread copyright infringement for training models on billions of scraped images. The New York Times has also sued OpenAI and Microsoft for using its copyrighted articles to train large language models. These cases collectively highlight the urgent need for legal frameworks to catch up with technological advancements, especially concerning copyright, fair use, and the economic rights of creators.

The outcome of Midjourney's motion to compel discovery, and ultimately the entire lawsuit with the Hollywood studios, will be closely watched by the entire AI industry, legal experts, and creative professionals. It could help define the boundaries of AI development and usage, influence future licensing agreements, and reshape the relationship between AI technology and copyrighted content in profound ways.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core of the lawsuit against Midjourney?

Hollywood studios like Disney, NBCUniversal, and Warner Bros. Discovery accuse Midjourney of copyright infringement. They allege that Midjourney used their copyrighted characters and intellectual property to train its AI models without permission, allowing the service to generate unauthorized images of these characters.

Why is Midjourney asking Hollywood studios to reveal their AI usage?

Midjourney is using a "fair use" and "unclean hands" defense. It argues that if the studios themselves are training AI models on copyrighted works without permission, then their claims against Midjourney for doing the same thing are weakened. Midjourney wants this information to prove that the studios are engaging in similar practices.

What kind of information is Midjourney seeking from the studios?

Midjourney is specifically requesting internal AI business plans, research reports, training datasets, model weights, and even presentations about AI that the studios used for their board meetings.

What is the current status of Midjourney's request for discovery?

A magistrate judge initially ruled to limit discovery to only "consumer-facing" AI applications, meaning internal AI usage details could be withheld by the studios. Midjourney is currently appealing this order to the federal court, seeking broader access to the studios' internal AI practices.