Midjourney is trying to turn a major Hollywood copyright lawsuit back toward the studios suing it, asking a federal court to force Disney, Universal and Warner Bros. Discovery to reveal more details about how they use generative AI in their own productions and internal workflows.
Midjourney Wants More Than Public AI Examples
The dispute is now focused on discovery, or the documents both sides must produce in court.
TechCrunch reported that a judge previously ruled the studios must provide information about their generative AI usage, but only when it led to “consumer-facing” videos and images.
Midjourney now wants that limit overturned.
Gizmodo reported that Midjourney filed a motion seeking details from each studio, including training datasets, business plans and board meeting presentations about generative AI.
The Fair Use Defense Takes Center Stage
Midjourney’s argument is that the studios’ own AI practices could matter to its defense.
Engadget reported that Midjourney argued that training AI with publicly available images is fair use and that the studios themselves use similar training practices for their own AI models.
Midjourney attorney Bobby Ghajar framed the issue sharply.
Ghajar shared that, “If Plaintiffs are doing the very thing they seek to punish,” that evidence goes to Midjourney’s “fair use and unclean hands defenses”.
Studios Say the Case Is About Famous Characters
The studios have accused Midjourney of copyright infringement because its image generator can create recognizable characters.
Disney and Universal sued Midjourney last year, noting that the startup’s models could generate images of characters such as Bart Simpson and Darth Vader, while Warner Bros. sued a few months later.
The studios’ lead attorney, David Singer, has pushed back against Midjourney’s request.
TechCrunch reported that Singer previously called Midjourney’s demand for documentation a “fishing expedition”.
Hollywood’s Own AI Use Could Become Evidence
The case could expose how deeply AI has already entered Hollywood’s production pipeline.
Midjourney claims the documents being withheld could reveal whether the studios are doing “behind closed doors” what they accuse Midjourney of doing. Gizmodo reported that Disney has been more transparent than the other studios about its AI interest, including a late-2025 $1 billion investment into OpenAI that would have brought “hundreds” of Disney characters to the Sora platform.
The fight is no longer only about whether Midjourney can generate copyrighted characters. It is also about whether Hollywood studios can attack AI companies for training practices while keeping their own AI strategies mostly private.
The federal judge’s decision could affect future lawsuits by setting a precedent for what kind of AI-related information can be admitted in court. If Midjourney succeeds, Hollywood’s AI use may become part of the legal record, not just a behind-the-scenes production question.
