It could spell the end of the "Move Fast and Break Things" era
- Disney and Universal allege Midjourney used copyrighted content without permission
-
The lawsuit could set precedent for how AI companies train models
-
Potential damages could exceed $15 million with massive industry-wide implications
Two of the worlds most powerful entertainment studios, Disney and Universal, have launched a potentially era-defining lawsuit against the AI image-generation company Midjourney. The suit alleges that Midjourney illegally trained its generative models on copyrighted materials including dozens of iconic characters without authorization or compensation.
The plaintiffs are seeking up to $150,000 per infringing work, a figure that could soar past $15 million if just 100 or more instances are proven in court. This isnt just about one AI company. Legal experts say the outcome could fundamentally change the foundation on which most modern AI tools are built.
Whats at stake?
At the core of the case is the question: Is it legal to train AI models on copyrighted content without a license? If the answer is no, companies like Midjourney, OpenAI, Google, and Anthropic all of which have used vast internet datasets to train their models could face massive legal and financial consequences.
Disney and Universals suit demands that Midjourney disclose exactly what training data it used, setting a potentially powerful new transparency precedent. If the studios win, it could lead to an injunction requiring Midjourney to freeze or rebuild its models using only properly licensed content a costly and time-consuming prospect.
The movie companies note that they are not only major corporations but also huge employers.The U.S. film and television business supports 2.3 million jobs and pays $229 billion in annual wages, according to the most recent economic figures from the Motion Picture Association, a Hollywood lobbying group.
Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism, the companies sayin the lawsuit.
A domino effect?
Legal observers warn that a victory for the studios would likely trigger a wave of follow-up lawsuits across the creative industries. Record labels, book publishers, game developers, and visual artists would be emboldened to take similar action against AI firms whose models were trained on copyrighted content scraped from the internet.
And it wouldnt stop with image generators. Text models like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude all trained on large corpora that may include copyrighted books, news articles, and websites could become new legal targets. The cumulative damages from such suits could reach billions of dollars, raising existential questions for the entire AI industry.
The end of the Move Fast era?
Until now, the AI field has largely operated under a "move fast and break things" philosophy collecting data first and asking legal questions later. This lawsuit could mark the end of that era. If courts rule that training on copyrighted content requires explicit licensing, the cost of developing AI systems could rise exponentially making it prohibitively expensive for startups and even a major obstacle for tech giants.
What happens in this case could shape the rules of AI development for a generation. For an industry that has grown with few restrictions, the next 12 months may bring a legal reckoning one that redraws the boundaries between innovation and intellectual property.
Posted: 2025-06-24 19:15:40