Studios Target Midjourney To Define AI Legal Boundaries

It is not often that individual artists creators and giant studio conglomerates find themselves on the same side but artificial intelligence has become that kind of unifying concern in the entertainment world.

A United Front Against AI Misuse

Last week both Disney and NBCUniversal sued AI company Midjourney for copyright infringement. While individuals have filed numerous lawsuits against companies like Midjourney for years objecting to the use of copyrighted material in training AI models and their outputs this is different. Two major studios joining forces to sue a prominent AI image generation tool for the same reasons marks a significant development.

However before celebrating studios as champions of artists rights it is important to consider that how this lawsuit unfolds could very well shape Disney NBCUniversal and other studios strategies for developing their own AI models. For now the Midjourney lawsuit has the potential to establish a precedent for artificial intelligence how AI companies can operate or train their models and ultimately affect all creative professionals.

Ray Seilie a trial attorney with Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir commented “It’s going to be an important case that’ll affect the rights held by almost all creatives regardless of how large they are.” He added “It’s a rare alliance in the legal industry or the entertainment legal industry where you see studios actually doing something that artists are 100 percent behind.”

The Core Allegations Copyright Infringement

The 143 page lawsuit filed against Midjourney is fundamentally a copyright lawsuit despite its occurrence at the intersection of AI and broader legal discussions about AI generated material's copyrightability. Disney and NBCUniversal claim that Midjourney is deliberately infringing on their most famous characters and intellectual property for profit. The suit alleges that any Midjourney subscriber using its image generator and soon its video generator can prompt the AI to create nearly perfect copies of characters like Darth Vader or the Minions.

The lawsuit reportedly includes compelling side by side comparisons of actual movie stills and Midjourney generated images. These are not mere facsimiles parodies or transformed versions of existing characters they are AI generated copies. This presents a significant challenge for Midjourney which has not yet responded to the complaint if it attempts a fair use defense.

“Just candidly I think it is hard to see how the courts will let Midjourney keep doing what it’s doing without any kind of restriction,” Seilie observed. “To me I think the studios have a very strong case here.”

Midjourney's Potential Defense and Studio Rebuttals

Seilie suggested Midjourney might argue it is merely a tool provider and that users are the ones violating copyright and breaking terms of service. This argument is tenuous as Midjourney profits from subscriptions and controls user capabilities.

A key point in the lawsuit is that Disney and NBCUniversal allegedly requested Midjourney to restrict users from creating images of copyrighted material but these requests were ignored. Midjourney already blocks users from generating violent or sexual content so the lawsuit implies they could similarly prevent generation of characters like Yoda.

Entertainment attorney Dale Nelson from Donaldson Callif Perez and formerly of Warner Bros stated “Legally speaking it’s clear that Midjourney is willfully infringing. They’re intentionally infringing and it sounds like they didn’t take any steps to try to mitigate or limit what the users could do on their platform.” Nelson continued “And willful infringement is far worse than infringement of the type where you have a good faith belief that what you were doing was okay. So the fact that they didn’t respond to the studios letters just doesn’t look good for Midjourney.”

Nelson also mentioned Midjourney might contend that a ruling against them could have wide ranging unintended consequences for the AI industry. However the studios lawyers seem to have anticipated this. “I think that they have made very specific factual allegations in their complaint probably wisely so that it’s not a lawsuit just about all AI. This is a very specific use that they’re complaining about,” Nelson explained.

What's at Stake for the Studios

This legal battle is crucial for Disney and NBCUniversal due to potential lost revenue. If individuals can easily generate AI images of their favorite Star Wars character for example they might be less inclined to purchase official Disney merchandise. Furthermore widespread AI generation of Disney characters in contexts more adult than the company prefers could damage its brand.

The Pursuit of Precedent and Future Implications

Seilie noted that the ruling could be narrow affecting only Midjourney’s operations. More likely however any decision will prompt other AI companies to proactively adjust their models or training methods to avoid similar lawsuits. A settlement where Midjourney pays Disney and NBCUniversal a licensing fee is also possible.

But Seilie anticipates a more profound outcome believing the studios will push for a definitive ruling. He thinks Disney and NBCUniversal will seek discovery to understand precisely how Midjourney’s models were trained and are used.

“The studios want the precedent here,” Seilie emphasized. “They want a district court opinion that says that scraping data for a training engine or using copyrighted material in training data is a copyright violation. I think they’re gonna want a ruling that says that and it’ll probably go through appeals.”

Establishing precedent is the central issue. It would provide studios with clarity on what materials can be used in training AI models whether for licensing third party AI for movie making or developing their own internal systems. Conversely a ruling favoring Midjourney could be “earth shaking” for the studios business models.

“It would be a sea change in the way that copyrighted material works,” Seilie concluded. “We would see a lot of changes in how studios operate or how creatives frankly operate.”