A Landmark Copyright Lawsuit in the Age of AI: Disney and Universal Sue Midjourney

Darth Vader Is not happy !

Filed by the Disney and Universal before the United States District Court for the Central District of California on June 11, 2025 the complaint accuses Midjourney of engaging in both direct and secondary copyright infringement, in violation of the U.S. Copyright Act.

The plaintiffs in this action are some of the most powerful players in the entertainment industry:

• Disney Enterprises, Inc., Marvel Characters, Inc., MVL Film Finance LLC, Lucasfilm Ltd. LLC, and Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation (collectively referred to as “Disney”);
• Universal City Studios Productions LLLP and DreamWorks Animation L.L.C. (collectively referred to as “Universal”).
  

The defendant is Midjourney, Inc., the well known Delaware-based company offering one of the most widely used generative AI platforms for creating synthetic images.

‍

Factual Allegations and Infringing Outputs

According to the plaintiffs, Midjourney’s image-generation service allows users to generate synthetic content that directly reproduces or mimics protected characters, scenes, and stylistic elements from the plaintiffs’ intellectual property portfolios. These outputs are not mere imitations: the plaintiffs allege that the generated content is often “blatantly derivative”, including highly recognizable renderings of characters such as Dark Vador (Darth Vader), Elsa, Iron Man, Buzz Lightyear, Shrek, and the Minions.

The complaint includes specific examples in which users were able to generate infringing images simply by prompting Midjourney with the names or visual traits of these iconic characters. These capabilities, argue the plaintiffs, amount to systemic copyright infringement on a mass scale.

As the plaintiffs succinctly put it: “Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider […] a bottomless pit of plagiarism.”

‍

Legal Grounds and Plaintiffs’ Demands

The legal basis of the action rests on two pillars:

1. Direct Infringement – Midjourney allegedly used plaintiffs’ copyrighted works both in the training of its AI models and in the unauthorized generation and public display of derivative works.
2. Secondary Infringement – Midjourney is further accused of facilitating, encouraging, and profiting from its users’ infringing activities by failing to implement filtering technologies or proactive safeguards.

The plaintiffs contend that Midjourney acted willfully, having been directly warned about the infringing uses and urged to adopt technical measures. Rather than cooperate, Midjourney allegedly chose to “double down” by continuing to promote the service and investing in the development of a forthcoming AI video generation platform, which is also likely to rely on unauthorized uses of protected works.

The complaint seeks several remedies, including:

• A permanent injunction to prevent further use, reproduction, or dissemination of infringing content or services;
• An order compelling Midjourney to implement technical measures to prevent future infringements;
• Damages, including:
  
  
  • Compensation for actual harm and lost profits;
  • Disgorgement of profits obtained by the defendant;
  • Or, in the alternative, statutory damages as permitted under 17 U.S.C. § 504.
    

Notably, the complaint does not yet specify any monetary figure for damages sought. This is a deliberate and strategic choice, common in U.S. copyright litigation. By refraining from quantifying damages at the outset, the plaintiffs preserve their ability to assess the scale of harm during the discovery phase, particularly by accessing Midjourney’s financial records and usage data; and choose later between actual damages (including provable harm and lost revenues) and statutory damages, which can reach up to $150,000 per work if willful infringement is established.

This procedural posture gives Disney and Universal maximum flexibility in quantifying the harm once the full extent of the infringement and associated revenues are brought to light.

‍

The Expanding Frontier: From Images to Video

The plaintiffs raise additional concerns about Midjourney’s announced “Video Service”, which is currently in development. They allege that the forthcoming platform is being trained, without authorization, on copyrighted video content and will likely generate synthetic video featuring infringing depictions of protected characters and scenes.

According to the complaint, this new product would exponentially amplify the scale and commercial impact of the violations. It is thus included proactively in the scope of the requested injunctive relief.

This lawsuit adds to a growing body of litigation surrounding the use of copyrighted material in generative AI, but it stands out as one of the first major claims in the realm of animated characters and entertainment franchises.

As the plaintiffs argue: “Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing.”

The action also signals how aggressively studios like Disney and Universal intend to defend their IP portfolios, particularly in the face of transformative technologies. In this context, fictional characters are more than artistic creations—they are financial assets and global symbols, forming the backbone of multi-billion-dollar enterprises.

To be followed very carefully by all AI Lawyers of the world !