Midjourney wants Hollywood studios to open up about their own AI use

Midjourney is pushing back against a court order that restricted what evidence Hollywood studios must hand over in a major AI copyright case — and the argument it's making could shift how these lawsuits play out across the entire industry. The company wants Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros. to reveal how they use AI internally, not just in products aimed at consumers. A federal judge's ruling next month could set a template for every AI copyright dispute that follows.

The lawsuit

Disney and Universal sued Midjourney in June 2025, claiming its model can generate images of characters they own the rights to — including Bart Simpson and Darth Vader — without authorization. Warner Bros. filed a separate suit in September 2025. Midjourney's defense centers on fair use: the argument that training AI models on copyrighted material is legally permissible, similar to how a human artist absorbs influences.

The fight has now moved to discovery — the pre-trial process where both sides must share relevant documents. Magistrate Judge Joel Richlin ruled in June 2026 that the studios only need to disclose their AI use in "consumer-facing" products, reports TechCrunch. Midjourney filed a motion on July 4 to overturn that limitation.

The core argument

Midjourney says the restricted scope lets studios hide the ball. If Disney or Universal use AI tools internally — for storyboarding, concept art, or pre-production — that information is directly relevant to whether AI training causes the kind of market harm the studios are claiming. The company also wants all text prompts the studios have submitted to AI services, and all outputs generated, not just the examples plaintiffs have cherry-picked as alleged infringements.

Studios' attorney David Singer has pushed back, calling Midjourney's demands a fishing expedition for documents unrelated to the actual dispute. He says the studios aren't trying to ban AI outright — they want Midjourney to stop reproducing their specific characters without permission.

What comes next

Judge John Kronstadt will decide whether to uphold or overturn Richlin's ruling. The outcome matters well beyond this case. US courts are already split on AI fair use — the Thomson Reuters v. Ross decision limited one common defense — and how judges handle discovery will shape what evidence future defendants can gather. If Midjourney wins this procedural battle, it gains a powerful tool: proof that the studios accusing it of harm are quietly doing the same thing themselves.