AI IP Year in Review – The (Media) Empire Strikes Back—An Update on Disney et al. v. Midjourney Inc.

In June 2025, some of the largest movie studios sued the image-GenAI company Midjourney Inc. in the Central District of California, accusing it of large-scale, willful copyright infringement. Disney et al. v. Midjourney Inc., No. 2:25-05275 (C.D. Cal. June 11, 2025).

Plaintiffs allege that Midjourney trains its GenAI model on unauthorized copies of plaintiffs’ films, television shows, and character artwork, then monetized that data by selling a tiered subscription service. In use, a subscriber of Midjourney’s image service can enter a bare-bones prompt without specifically identifying the copyrighted character and yet the model can still output a copyrighted character. Further, Midjourney publicly uses many of these outputs to entice new customers and upgrade existing ones.

Legal Claims

The suit pleads direct and secondary infringement under the Copyright Act.

Direct infringement. Plaintiffs contend that Midjourney itself makes the infringing reproductions by (1) copying plaintiffs’ works into its training set and (2) generating, displaying, and distributing derivative images in response to user prompts, all without license. The infringement is willful because plaintiffs sent Midjourney letters, which it ignored.

Secondary infringement. Plaintiffs allege Midjourney knowingly provides the tools and inducement that make the violations possible. The complaint stresses that Midjourney could have prevented—or at least curbed—copying. And the availability of infringing outputs is a key draw that drives Midjourney’s revenue.

Damages. Plaintiffs seek statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work or full actual damages and profits, plus injunctive relief halting further use of their content.

Update

Midjourney has since filed its answer. In addition to denying most of plaintiffs’ allegations, Midjourney has raised several affirmative defenses including fair use, unclean hands, de minimis copying, and failure to comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The unclean hands defense is based on plaintiffs’ own use of and benefit from using Midjourney’s AI model and plaintiffs’ own training of GenAI models using copyrighted materials.

Takeaways

• Moderation Backfiring. Midjourney’s efforts to ensure improper content does not get generated and to enforce compliance with its community standards backfired.
• DMCA. Midjourney’s affirmative defense under the DMCA is a notable use of the DMCA as a defensive tactic rather than the more typical use of the DMCA as an offensive tool by copyright holders.
• Infringement by the Unwary. GenAI users creating public-facing content should be aware that GenAI can output copyrighted materials even when users’ prompts do not specifically call for it.

Read the original article IP Hot Topic: The (Media) Empire Strikes Back.

This article appeared in the 2025 AI Intellectual Property: Analysis & Trends Year in Review report.