Midjourney’s Ongoing Legal Dispute with Hollywood Studios

As part of an ongoing legal dispute with three Hollywood studios, AI startup Midjourney is seeking to compel those studios to reveal how they use AI themselves. The dispute revolves around allegations of copyright infringement, with Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. suing Midjourney for allegedly creating images of characters owned by the studios using its image-generation models.

Midjourney argues that training its AI models on images of copyrighted characters is permitted under fair use. The startup claims that the studios are using AI to create images and videos for internal use in storyboarding and ideating content for film or TV, and that this evidence would demonstrate that it is an industry custom to download and train AI on unlicensed copyrighted content.

However, the studios’ lead attorney, David Singer, previously claimed that Midjourney is seeking this documentation as part of a ‘fishing expedition.’ He also stated that 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.

In its latest filing, Midjourney seeks to overturn a previous judge’s ruling that the studios would only have to provide information about their generative AI usage when it led to ‘consumer-facing’ videos and images. Midjourney argues that this limitation 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.

Midjourney goes on to claim 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.’ The startup is seeking to compel the studios to 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 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. In its latest filing, 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.’

Midjourney’s latest filing also highlights the need for transparency in the use of AI in the entertainment industry. The startup 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. This would provide a more complete understanding of the use of AI in the entertainment industry and would help to determine whether Midjourney’s actions were indeed infringing on the studios’ copyrights.

In conclusion, Midjourney’s ongoing legal dispute with Hollywood studios highlights the need for transparency in the use of AI in the entertainment industry. The startup’s latest filing seeks to compel the studios to reveal the truth about their AI usage, and argues that the studios’ use of AI for internal purposes is a key factor in determining whether Midjourney’s actions were indeed infringing on the studios’ copyrights.

Key Points:

• Midjourney is seeking to compel Hollywood studios to reveal how they use AI themselves.
• The dispute revolves around allegations of copyright infringement.
• Midjourney argues that training its AI models on images of copyrighted characters is permitted under fair use.
• The studios’ lead attorney claims that Midjourney is seeking this documentation as part of a ‘fishing expedition.’
• Midjourney seeks to overturn a previous judge’s ruling that the studios would only have to provide information about their generative AI usage when it led to ‘consumer-facing’ videos and images.