Midjourney wants Hollywood studios to reveal the details of their AI usage
Midjourney is asking Hollywood studios to disclose their own AI usage as part of an ongoing copyright dispute, arguing that studios should not be allowed to selectively reveal information.
Intelligence analysis by Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
AI image generator Midjourney is pushing back against Hollywood studios suing it for copyright infringement by demanding those same studios reveal their internal use of AI, arguing that studios are also training and using AI on unlicensed content.
Imagine two kids fighting over who copied whose drawing. One kid (Midjourney) says, 'You copied my drawing style!' The other kid (Hollywood) says, 'No, you did!' Now, the first kid is saying, 'Wait, before we fight, let me see if *you* copied drawings from other people's sketchbooks too, because if you did, maybe it's okay for me to do it.'
Analysis
A Legal Tussle Over AI Transparency
The ongoing legal dispute between AI startup Midjourney and major Hollywood studios like Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. has escalated beyond simple copyright infringement claims. Midjourney, accused of training its models on copyrighted characters, is now demanding that the studios themselves reveal the extent and nature of their own generative AI usage. This counter-offensive is rooted in Midjourney's defense that training AI on copyrighted material is a form of fair use, a practice it alleges the studios also engage in behind closed doors.
The core of the current legal skirmish lies in the discovery process, where parties exchange relevant documentation. A previous judicial ruling limited the studios' obligation to disclose information about their AI use to instances that resulted in "consumer-facing" videos and images. Midjourney argues this limitation is "unfair," allowing studios to selectively present evidence that supports their claims of market harm while withholding information that could bolster Midjourney's defense. The AI company contends that the documents studios are withholding are crucial for demonstrating that using and training AI on unlicensed copyrighted content is an established industry custom, even among the very studios that are suing Midjourney.
The 'Industry Custom' Defense
Midjourney's argument hinges on the idea that if Hollywood studios are developing and using AI for internal purposes like storyboarding, content ideation, or even generating assets for films and TV shows, this practice would serve as evidence that such methods are standard within the industry. This would significantly weaken the studios' claims of unique harm caused by Midjourney's actions. By demanding access to these internal AI usage details, Midjourney aims to establish a precedent that AI training on copyrighted material is a common practice across the board, thereby normalizing its own alleged infringement under the umbrella of fair use. The startup is also seeking all prompts and outputs used by the studios within Midjourney, not just those that allegedly resulted in infringing images, further broadening the scope of the discovery to paint a comprehensive picture of AI's integration into studio workflows.
Accusations of a 'Fishing Expedition'
The studios, however, have characterized Midjourney's demands as a "fishing expedition," suggesting the AI company is seeking irrelevant information in hopes of finding something to derail their case. The studios' lead attorney, David Singer, has stated that their objective is not to halt AI technology but to prevent Midjourney from "copying their movies and TV shows" and creating unauthorized derivative works. This framing positions the studios as protectors of their intellectual property against unauthorized commercial exploitation, while Midjourney's counter-move attempts to reframe the narrative as a broader industry-wide practice that the studios are hypocritically trying to police only when it comes from external AI developers. The outcome of this legal battle could set significant precedents for how AI is developed, trained, and regulated within the creative industries.
Key points
- Midjourney is demanding Hollywood studios reveal their own AI usage in an ongoing copyright dispute.
- The AI startup argues that studios also train and use AI on unlicensed copyrighted content, supporting its fair use defense.
- Midjourney seeks to overturn a ruling that limits studios' disclosure to 'consumer-facing' AI outputs.
- The company claims studios are withholding documents that would prove AI usage is an industry custom.
- Studios have accused Midjourney of conducting a 'fishing expedition' for irrelevant information.
If Midjourney's arguments prevail, it could lead to greater transparency in how Hollywood studios utilize AI, potentially establishing clearer guidelines for fair use in AI training. This could foster a more open environment for AI development within the creative industries, encouraging innovation while acknowledging existing practices.
The studios could successfully argue that their internal AI usage is proprietary and distinct from Midjourney's alleged infringement, leading to a ruling that limits Midjourney's fair use defense. This outcome might embolden studios to pursue stricter controls over AI development and copyright, potentially stifling innovation and creating a more litigious environment for AI startups.
