## Midjourney Counters Disney & Universal Lawsuit, Citing "Fair Use" and Studios' Own AI Adoption **News Title:** Midjourney Slams Lawsuit Filed by Disney to Prevent AI Training: Can’t ‘Have It Both Ways’ **Report Provider:** ARTnews.com (Reported by Gene Maddaus for Variety) **Date:** Response filed Wednesday evening, August 11, 2025. ### Summary of Key Information: Midjourney, a popular AI image platform, has issued its initial response to a copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Disney and Universal. The core of Midjourney's defense rests on the argument that **AI training constitutes "fair use"** under copyright law, asserting that studios do not possess absolute control over the use of their copyrighted works for such purposes. #### Key Arguments by Midjourney: * **"Fair Use" Defense:** Midjourney contends that copyright law must allow for "fair use" to safeguard public interests in the free flow of ideas and information. They argue that the "limited monopoly granted by copyright must give way to fair use." * **Studios' Hypocrisy:** Midjourney accuses Disney and Universal of attempting to "have it both ways." The company claims that the studios themselves utilize AI tools, including Midjourney, while simultaneously seeking to penalize a popular AI service. * **Internal Use by Studios:** Midjourney's filing indicates that "many dozens" of its subscribers have email addresses linked to Disney and Universal, suggesting that employees of these studios are also users of the platform. * **CEO's Positive Stance on AI:** Midjourney highlights statements made by Disney CEO Bob Iger, who reportedly spoke approvingly of AI in March, calling it an "invaluable tool for artists." * **Distinction from Other Lawsuits:** The lawsuit filed by Disney and Universal primarily focuses on the *outputs* generated by AI, claiming users create images substantially similar to copyrighted works. This differs from other lawsuits that target the AI training process itself as infringement. * **User Terms of Service:** Midjourney states that its users are required to adhere to terms of service that prohibit intellectual property infringement. * **Legitimate Grounds for Similar Images:** Midjourney argues that creating images similar to copyrighted works does not automatically equate to infringement. They cite legitimate, non-infringing reasons for such creations, including: * Non-commercial fan art * Experimentation and ideation * Social commentary and criticism #### Allegations in the Original Lawsuit: Disney and Universal accused Midjourney of "vast, intentional, and unrelenting copyright infringement" in their June filing. They claimed that users on the platform could produce "nearly identical copies" of their copyrighted characters. #### Legal Representation: Midjourney is represented by Bobby Ghajar, John Paul Oleksiuk, Judd Lauter, and Ellie Dupler of Cooley LLP. Bobby Ghajar also represents Meta in a separate case involving accusations of illicit AI training on authors' books.
Midjourney Slams Lawsuit Filed by Disney to Prevent AI Training: Can’t ‘Have It Both Ways’
Read original at ARTnews.com →Midjourney issued its first response to a lawsuit brought by Disney and Universal, arguing that the studios have no power to prevent AI training on its works.The studios accused Midjourney — a startup AI image platform — of “vast, intentional, and unrelenting copyright infringement” in a suit filed in June, claiming that users on the platform were able to produce nearly identical copies of the studios’ copyrighted characters.
In a response filed Wednesday evening, Midjourney argued that AI training is protected “fair use.”Related Articles“Copyright law does not confer absolute control over the use of copyrighted works,” Midjourney’s lawyers argued. “The limited monopoly granted by copyright must give way to fair use, which safeguards countervailing public interests in the free flow of ideas and information.
”Midjourney also argued that the studios are trying to “have it both ways,” using AI tools themselves while seeking to punish a popular AI service. According to the filing, Midjourney is a popular tool among visual effects companies and other vendors that work with Disney and Universal.The response also states that “many dozens” of Midjourney’s subscribers have email addresses linked to Disney and Universal — suggesting the studios’ own employees are also using the service.
Midjourney’s lawyers also note that Disney CEO Bob Iger spoke approvingly of AI during an annual meeting in March, saying that “technology is an invaluable tool for artists.”“Plaintiffs cannot have it both ways, seeking to profit — through their use of Midjourney and other generative AI tools — from industry-standard AI training practices on the one hand, while on the other hand accusing Midjourney of wrongdoing for the same,” the filing states.
The Disney-Universal lawsuit largely focuses on AI outputs, arguing that Midjourney users are creating images that are substantially similar to the studios’ copyrighted works. In that sense, the suit is different from other lawsuits that have argued that AI training alone constitutes infringement.In response, Midjourney states that its users are required to adhere to the terms of service, which forbid infringing on intellectual property rights.
But merely creating images similar to copyrighted works is not enough to show infringement, the company’s lawyers argue.“Indeed, there are any number of legitimate, noninfringing grounds to create images incorporating characters from popular culture like those claimed by Plaintiffs, including non-commercial fan art, experimentation and ideation, and social commentary and criticism,” Midjourney’s lawyers wrote.
“Plaintiffs seek to stifle them all.”Midjourney is represented by Bobby Ghajar, John Paul Oleksiuk, Judd Lauter and Ellie Dupler of Cooley LLP. Ghajar also represents Meta in a case in which authors have accused the company of illicitly training its AI language model on their books.
