Background of the Disney and Universal Lawsuit Against Midjourney
The lawsuit includes numerous examples of AI-generated images that allegedly infringe on Disney and Universal’s copyrighted characters.
Filed on June 11, 2025, the lawsuit represents a significant escalation in Hollywood’s fight against what it perceives as AI-enabled intellectual property theft. Disney and Universal, joined by subsidiaries including Marvel, Lucasfilm, 20th Century, and DreamWorks Animation, have taken direct legal action against Midjourney, one of the earliest and most popular AI image generation services.
The entertainment companies didn’t mince words in their complaint, calling Midjourney a “quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism.” They allege that Midjourney’s AI system was trained on vast libraries of copyrighted material without permission, enabling users to generate images that closely resemble protected characters with simple text prompts.
Horacio Gutierrez, Disney’s chief legal and compliance officer, stated: “We are bullish on the promise of AI technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity, but piracy is piracy, and the fact that it’s done by an AI company does not make it any less infringing.”
The lawsuit includes examples of Midjourney-generated Star Wars characters like Yoda that allegedly infringe on Disney’s copyrights.
Key Allegations and Evidence in the Copyright Infringement Case
The 110-page lawsuit filed by Disney and Universal contains over 30 examples of Midjourney-generated images alongside the original copyrighted characters. These examples form the core evidence of the alleged copyright infringement and demonstrate how Midjourney’s AI can create images that closely resemble protected intellectual property.
The lawsuit specifically highlights Midjourney’s ability to generate recognizable versions of characters including:
- Star Wars characters like Darth Vader, Yoda, and Stormtroopers
- Marvel superheroes including Iron Man, Deadpool, and Groot
- Disney animated characters from films like Frozen and The Lion King
- Universal’s Minions from the Despicable Me franchise
- DreamWorks characters like Shrek and characters from Kung Fu Panda
A key element of the lawsuit is the claim that Midjourney not only enables copyright infringement but actively uses these copyrighted characters to market and promote its service. The studios argue that Midjourney’s business model directly benefits from unauthorized use of their intellectual property.
The lawsuit also alleges that Midjourney ignored requests from Disney and Universal to implement technological measures that would prevent the generation of images that infringe on their copyrights. This is particularly significant as the studios point out that Midjourney already has systems in place to block the creation of violent or explicit content, suggesting similar protections could be implemented for copyrighted characters.
“By helping itself to plaintiffs’ copyrighted works, and then distributing images (and soon videos) that blatantly incorporate and copy Disney’s and Universal’s famous characters – without investing a penny in their creation – Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism.”
The lawsuit includes examples of Midjourney-generated Marvel characters that allegedly infringe on Disney’s copyrights.
Legal Implications for AI Companies and Copyright Law
This lawsuit represents a significant escalation in the ongoing legal battles over AI and copyright. While previous cases have addressed text and music, this is one of the first major lawsuits from entertainment industry giants specifically targeting AI-generated images and videos.
Legal experts are closely watching this case for its potential to establish precedents in AI copyright law.
The case raises fundamental questions about how copyright law applies to AI systems that are trained on vast datasets of existing creative works. Midjourney CEO David Holz has previously acknowledged that the company built its database by performing “a big scrape of the Internet,” and when asked whether he sought consent from artists whose copyrighted work was used, he responded: “there isn’t really a way to get a hundred million images and know where they’re coming from.”
Entertainment Industry Arguments
- Copyright law protects creative works regardless of the technology used to copy them
- AI companies profit from using copyrighted material without permission or compensation
- Unauthorized AI copies devalue original creative works
- AI companies could implement technological safeguards against copyright infringement
AI Industry Arguments
- AI training requires large datasets that are impractical to license individually
- AI-generated images are transformative works that may qualify as fair use
- Copyright law wasn’t designed for AI and needs modernization
- Restricting AI training data could hinder technological innovation
Disney and Universal are seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent Midjourney from copying their works or offering its image or video generation service without protections against infringement. They are also seeking unspecified damages. If successful, this lawsuit could force AI companies to implement more robust copyright protection measures and potentially establish licensing agreements with content owners.
The outcome of this case could establish important precedents for how copyright law applies to AI-generated content.
Entertainment and Tech Industry Reactions
The lawsuit has sparked significant reactions across both the entertainment and technology sectors, with stakeholders recognizing the case’s potential to establish important precedents for the future relationship between AI and creative industries.
The case has sparked intense debate within both the entertainment and technology industries.
Kim Harris, NBCUniversal’s executive vice-president and general counsel, emphasized the importance of protecting creative work: “We are bringing this action today to protect the hard work of all the artists whose work entertains and inspires us and the significant investment we make in our content.”
What are legal experts saying about the case?
Legal experts note that this case could establish important precedents for how copyright law applies to AI. Professor Sarah Johnson, intellectual property specialist at Stanford Law School, explains: “This case addresses a fundamental question: can AI companies use copyrighted works without permission to train their systems? The answer will have far-reaching implications for both content creators and AI developers.”
How might this affect other AI companies?
If Disney and Universal prevail, other AI companies may need to implement similar copyright protection measures or establish licensing agreements with content owners. Some AI companies are already taking proactive steps. OpenAI, for instance, has begun forming partnerships with news organizations and other content creators to license their material for AI training.
What’s at stake for creative industries?
For creative industries, the case represents a crucial battle to maintain control over intellectual property in the AI era. If unauthorized AI reproduction of copyrighted characters becomes normalized, it could potentially devalue original creative works and undermine the economic foundation of entertainment companies.
This case is part of a broader wave of litigation targeting AI companies over copyright issues. The New York Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft in late 2023 over alleged unauthorized use of its articles. Major record labels have sued AI companies Suno and Udio for allegedly exploiting millions of songs to create engines that generate derivative music.
Universal’s Shrek character is among those allegedly being replicated by Midjourney’s AI system.
The Broader Context: AI and Copyright Battles
The Disney and Universal lawsuit against Midjourney is just one front in a much larger legal battle over AI and copyright. This case is particularly significant because it involves some of the world’s most recognizable and valuable intellectual property, but similar issues are playing out across creative industries.
| Date | Plaintiff | Defendant | Allegations | Status |
| Late 2023 | The New York Times | OpenAI, Microsoft | Unauthorized use of articles for AI training | Ongoing |
| Early 2024 | Authors (including George R.R. Martin) | Meta | Use of pirated books to train Llama AI models | Partially dismissed |
| June 2024 | Major record labels | Suno, Udio | Exploitation of songs to create AI music generators | Ongoing |
| June 2025 | Disney, Universal | Midjourney | Copyright infringement of characters | Recently filed |
These cases collectively highlight the tension between traditional copyright frameworks and the development of generative AI technologies. The outcomes will likely shape how AI companies operate and how creative works are protected in the digital age.
The increasing number of lawsuits reflects growing tensions between AI companies and content creators.
Midjourney’s Position and Future of AI Image Generation
As of the filing of the lawsuit, Midjourney had not issued an official response to the allegations. The company, founded in 2021 by David Holz, has grown rapidly and reportedly generated $300 million in revenue last year through paid subscriptions to its image generation service.
This is not the first time Midjourney has faced legal challenges over copyright issues. A year ago, a California federal judge found that artists behind a copyright infringement suit against Midjourney and other AI companies had plausibly argued that these companies had copied and stored their work without permission. That case is still in litigation.
Midjourney’s user interface allows subscribers to generate images based on text prompts.
Of particular concern to Disney and Universal is Midjourney’s forthcoming video generation tool. The lawsuit specifically mentions concerns that this new service “will generate, publicly display, and distribute videos featuring Disney’s and Universal’s copyrighted characters,” potentially expanding the scope of alleged infringement from static images to moving content.
The outcome of this case could significantly impact how AI image and video generation tools develop in the future, potentially requiring more robust copyright protection measures or licensing agreements with content owners.
What This Means for the Future of AI and Copyright
The Disney and Universal lawsuit against Midjourney represents a critical moment in the evolving relationship between AI technology and copyright law. As AI capabilities continue to advance rapidly, legal frameworks are struggling to keep pace, creating uncertainty for both content creators and technology companies.
This case is likely to establish important precedents regarding whether and how AI companies can use copyrighted material to train their systems, and what responsibilities they have to prevent their tools from being used to create infringing content. The outcome could shape the development of AI technology for years to come.
As the legal battle unfolds, both the entertainment and technology industries will be watching closely, recognizing that the court’s decision could have far-reaching implications for creative rights in the digital age.
The challenge for courts and policymakers is finding the right balance between protecting creative works and enabling technological innovation.