Lawsuit tracker
Disney & Universal v. Midjourney
Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Midjourney, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-05275 (C.D. Cal.)
| Plaintiffs | Walt Disney Company entities (including Marvel and Lucasfilm) and NBCUniversal entities (including Universal City Studios and DreamWorks Animation) |
|---|---|
| Defendants | Midjourney, Inc. |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California |
| Filed | 2025-06-11 |
| Status | Active |
| Content type | film & TV |
| Last updated | 2026-07-21 |
The claims
Direct and secondary copyright infringement over model training and outputs depicting the studios’ characters; injunction and damages sought
What has happened
On June 11, 2025, Disney and NBCUniversal filed the first major Hollywood studio lawsuit against a generative AI company. The complaint calls Midjourney a "virtual vending machine" for infringing images, showing outputs of Darth Vader, Elsa, the Minions, Shrek, Bart Simpson and other characters, and alleges the service was trained on the studios’ works without permission while earning roughly $300 million in annual revenue. It also flagged Midjourney’s then-forthcoming video product. Midjourney answered on August 6, 2025, denying infringement and leading with a transformative fair-use defense. On November 4, 2025, the court consolidated the separate Warner Bros. action into this case, with the Disney action as lead. Discovery has continued through 2026, including reported disputes over Midjourney’s requests for material about the studios’ own internal AI projects; no dispositive ruling has issued.
Key developments
- 2025-06-11 — Disney and NBCUniversal entities sued Midjourney — the first major studio action against a generative AI developer, covering both training and character outputs.
- 2025-08-06 — Midjourney answered, denying the allegations and asserting transformative fair use as its lead defense.
- 2025-11-04 — The court consolidated the Warner Bros. Entertainment case against Midjourney into this action, with the Disney case designated lead.
- 2026-07 — Discovery continued, with reported skirmishes over Midjourney’s demands for the studios’ internal AI project materials; dispositive motions reportedly due by late November 2026.
Why it matters for training data
This case moves the fight from individual artists to rights holders with the deepest catalogs and litigation budgets in entertainment, and it targets outputs (recognizable characters) as much as training data. A ruling on whether character generation defeats fair use would shape every image and video model’s guardrail obligations. For data suppliers, it signals that studio-owned imagery is radioactive without a licence; for buyers, output filtering is becoming as important as training-set provenance.
Sources
- Variety on the filing
- CourtListener docket
- Artnet on Midjourney’s answer
- McKool Smith AI litigation update (consolidation)
- ForensisGroup case overview
Deeper analysis
Want data that clears this in diligence?
Whether you're building a model or sitting on an archive, the first conversation is short and specific.
Send a brief