- Access the court document about Midjourney from here
AI image generator Midjourney is asking a US court to force Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. to disclose how they use artificial intelligence internally, arguing that the studios may be engaging in the same practices they are suing the company over.
How the dispute began: The request is part of an ongoing copyright lawsuit in which Disney and Universal sued Midjourney in June 2025, followed by Warner Bros. in September 2025. The studios allege that Midjourney trained its AI models on copyrighted material and allows users to generate images of protected characters such as Darth Vader, Bart Simpson, Superman, and Batman without permission. Midjourney has denied wrongdoing and argues that training AI models on copyrighted works is protected under the fair use doctrine.
Discovery battle moves to AI practices: The latest dispute is over the scope of evidence that the studios must hand over during the discovery process. A judge had earlier ruled that the studios must produce information about their use of generative AI but limited it to AI systems that created “consumer-facing” images and videos.
Midjourney is now challenging that restriction. In a court filing, it argues that the limitation lets the studios “cherry-pick only those documents they believe support their market harm claims while depriving Midjourney of documents that would support its defenses.”
The company further argues that the withheld records “would reveal whether, behind closed doors, they are doing exactly what they are suing Midjourney for doing.” According to the filing, if the studios are training AI models on unlicensed copyrighted material for internal purposes such as storyboarding or developing ideas for films and television, it would support Midjourney’s argument that such practices are common across the industry.
What else Midjourney wants: Midjourney also wants the studios to disclose all prompts their employees or investigators entered into its AI system, along with the resulting images, instead of only the prompts cited in the lawsuits. In its filing, the company argues that because the studios are seeking to hold it liable for images created by users, “Midjourney, and the fact-finder need to know which (and how many) prompts and outputs were generated by Plaintiffs and their agents because, as a matter of law, those outputs cannot be infringing.”
The filing also challenges the judge’s “consumer-facing” limitation, saying there is no legal basis to distinguish between AI developed for public use and AI used internally. It argues that if studios are training AI on unlicensed copyrighted works for internal creative processes, that evidence is equally relevant to its fair use and unclean hands defenses.
Studios oppose broader disclosure: The studios have opposed the broader disclosure request. Their lead lawyer, David Singer, previously described Midjourney’s demand as a “fishing…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
