Disney, Universal and DreamWorks accuse Midjourney of mass copyright infringement for generating their most famous characters on demand, Hollywood’s first direct assault on a generative image company. Midjourney’s fair-use defense and a fight over discovery into the studios’ own AI use now shape the case.
LATEST DEVELOPMENT · AUG 31, 2026
Judge Kronstadt heard Midjourney’s motion for review of the June discovery limits on August 17, 2026 and took it under submission. A ruling is pending. Discovery continues before Magistrate Judge Richlin, who on August 31 found the earlier motions to compel moot and set briefing on the remaining training-data dispute, with the studios’ motion due September 10 and Midjourney’s opposition September 24, and an informal discovery conference on September 14, 2026. The studios’ August 12 opposition to Midjourney’s July 22 motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, which invokes the Supreme Court’s Cox v. Sony ruling on secondary liability, also awaits decision.
BACKGROUND
Disney, Universal and DreamWorks sued Midjourney in June 2025 in the first direct copyright action by major Hollywood studios against a generative image company, alleging that the service was trained on their works and generates high-quality images of protected characters, from Darth Vader and Yoda to Avengers and Toy Story figures, on demand and with no protective guardrails. The complaint brands Midjourney ‘the quintessential copyright free-rider’. Midjourney answered in August 2025, resting its defense on transformative fair use, and Warner Bros. Discovery filed a parallel suit that September over Superman, Batman, Scooby-Doo and other characters, seeking up to $150,000 per infringed work.
The case, before Judge John A. Kronstadt, is deep in discovery. On June 15, 2026, Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin mostly denied Midjourney’s motion to compel discovery into the studios’ own internal use and development of AI, finding it irrelevant to the fair-use defense and treating the studios’ test prompts as protected work product. Midjourney asked Judge Kronstadt to overturn those limits on June 29, 2026, arguing the studios’ own AI-training practices would show industry custom. Judge Kronstadt heard that motion on August 17, 2026 and took it under submission, with dispositive motions to follow.
TIMELINE
-
AUG 31, 2026PROCEDURALMagistrate Judge Richlin sets briefing on the remaining training-data discovery dispute
-
AUG 25, 2026FILINGMidjourney replies in support of its motion for judgment on the pleadings
-
AUG 17, 2026HEARINGJudge Kronstadt hears Midjourney’s motion for review of the discovery limits and takes it under submission
-
AUG 12, 2026FILINGStudios oppose Midjourney’s bid to narrow copyright claimsDisney, Warner Bros. and NBCUniversal filed an opposition arguing Midjourney misreads the Cox Communications ruling and that the decision does not foreclose claims of intentionally promoting infringement.
-
JUL 22, 2026FILINGMidjourney moves for partial judgment on the pleadings, citing Cox v. SonyMidjourney asked the court to trim contributory infringement claims brought by Disney, Universal and Warner Bros., arguing the claims conflict with the U.S. Supreme Court’s Cox Communications decision limiting secondary copyright liability for internet service providers.
-
JUN 29, 2026PROCEDURALMidjourney seeks district-judge review of the discovery limitsMidjourney argues the studios’ own AI-training practices support its fair-use and unclean-hands defenses. Hearing set for August 17, 2026.
-
JUN 15, 2026PROCEDURALMagistrate judge curbs Midjourney’s discovery into studios’ AI useJudge Richlin mostly denies Midjourney’s motion to compel discovery on the studios’ internal AI development, and shields their test prompts as work product.
-
DEC 2025PROCEDURALParties select retired Judge Suzanne H. Segal as mediatorDisney and Midjourney jointly selected the Hon. Suzanne H. Segal, a retired Central District of California magistrate judge, to serve as the private neutral for their court-ordered mediation.
-
NOV 17, 2025PROCEDURALParties referred to private mediation, status conference set for August 31, 2026The court granted the parties’ request to hold a settlement conference with a private neutral, ordering a post-mediation status conference for August 31, 2026, with an August 21, 2026 deadline to report if settlement is reached.
-
NOV 14, 2025PROCEDURALCourt enters scheduling order governing discovery and expert disclosuresFollowing consolidation, the court entered a scheduling order setting deadlines for discovery, expert disclosures, and motion practice, with initial expert disclosures set for October 14, 2026 and expert discovery extending into November 2026.
-
NOV 4, 2025PROCEDURALCourt consolidates Warner Bros. suit into the Disney/Universal actionThe court granted the parties’ stipulation to consolidate the parallel Warner Bros. Entertainment copyright suit against Midjourney with the Disney/Universal/DreamWorks case, designating the Disney action as the lead case and terminating the Warner Bros. docket as a separate matter.
-
SEP 4, 2025FILINGWarner Bros. Discovery files parallel suitAn 87-page complaint over Superman, Batman, Scooby-Doo and other characters seeks up to $150,000 per infringed work, emphasizing secondary-liability theories.
-
AUG 6, 2025PROCEDURALMidjourney answers, leading with fair useMidjourney denies liability and likens model training to human learning from exposure to images.
-
JUN 11, 2025FILINGDisney, Universal and DreamWorks sue MidjourneyThe studios allege training on their works and on-demand generation of protected characters, seeking statutory damages and an injunction conditioning the service on copyright protections.