Midjourney Wants Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. to Reveal Their Own AI Practices

Disney and Universal sued AI image-generation startup Midjourney in 2025, alleging that its platform enabled users to produce nearly identical copies of their copyrighted characters — including Bart Simpson and Darth Vader. Warner Bros. joined the suit a few months later with similar claims regarding characters like Superman and Batman. Midjourney has argued throughout that training AI models on copyrighted imagery is protected under fair use, a position it has maintained since filing its initial response to the lawsuit.

The latest legal flashpoint concerns the discovery phase of the case. A judge previously ruled that the studios must provide information about their own generative AI usage — but only when it resulted in consumer-facing products. Midjourney has now filed to overturn that limitation, arguing that restricting disclosure to consumer-facing outputs allows the studios to "cherry-pick" only documents that support their case while withholding evidence that could bolster Midjourney's defense.

In its filing, Midjourney contends that the withheld documents are "precisely those that would reveal whether, behind closed doors, they are doing exactly what they are suing Midjourney for doing." The startup also asks that all prompts the studios used within Midjourney — not just those producing allegedly infringing images — be disclosed.

Midjourney's core legal strategy rests on what's legally known as an "unclean hands" defense. The startup argues that if Disney, Universal, or Warner Bros. are themselves developing AI image-generation tools trained on unlicensed copyrighted content — even for internal uses like storyboarding or ideation — that would demonstrate it's an industry-wide custom, not unique wrongdoing. Midjourney's earlier response to the lawsuit also noted that "many dozens" of subscribers had email addresses linked to the studios, and that Disney's own CEO publicly praised AI as "an invaluable tool for artists."

The studios' lead attorney David Singer has pushed back, calling Midjourney's disclosure requests a "fishing expedition" and clarifying that the studios do not seek to shut down Midjourney's business — only to stop it from reproducing their characters without authorization.

A California federal magistrate judge has already ordered Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. to produce some data on their AI usage — but drew limits. The judge found that some of Midjourney's broader requests were either irrelevant to the core claims or protected under work product privileges. The legal battle over the scope of discovery is ongoing, and the outcome could set meaningful precedent for how AI training practices are treated in copyright disputes across the entertainment industry.