Disney and Universal have initiated a lawsuit against the AI image generator Midjourney, alleging widespread copyright infringement that enables users to produce images that “explicitly incorporate and mimic well-known Disney and Universal characters.” This lawsuit could mark a significant shift in the ongoing legal discourse surrounding AI-related copyright issues faced by book publishers, news outlets, and other content creators.

The Midjourney tool, which generates images based on textual prompts, boasts around 20 million users on its Discord platform. Users provide their input for creation.

In the lawsuit, the two film production giants provide examples where Midjourney can generate images surprisingly similar to characters it does not own rights to, like the Disney-owned Minions and characters from The Lion King. They assert that these results stem from the AI being trained on their copyrighted materials. They also contend that Midjourney “disregarded” their attempts to resolve these issues before resorting to legal action.

The complaint states, “Midjourney is a classic copyright-free rider and an endless source of plagiarism.” Midjourney has not yet issued a response to New Scientist‘s request for comment.

The lawsuit is applauded by Ed Newton Rex, a nonprofit advocate for fairer training practices within AI companies. “This is a monumental day for creators globally,” he comments. “The government has displayed unsettling tendencies toward legalizing intellectual property theft, potentially yielding to the intense lobbying from Big Tech.

Newton-Rex alleges that Midjourney engineers previously justified their actions on the grounds that the art had become “ossified.” “Fortunately, this absurd defense is unlikely to hold up in court,” he adds.

Legal experts express candid perspectives on Midjourney’s likelihood of success. “It’s Disney; thus, Midjourney is in a precarious position, please excuse my bluntness,” remarks Andres Guadams from the University of Sussex, UK.

Guadams emphasizes Disney’s resolute approach to safeguarding its intellectual property—rarely, but effectively—underscoring the necessity of this intervention. The film studio took action several months following other entities, such as news publishers, in their pursuit against AI companies for the alleged unauthorized use of their creations. Many of those disputes were resolved through licensing agreements between the AI firms and copyright holders.

“Media conglomerates are excited about potential breaches. The models have improved to such an extent that they can effortlessly create characters that come to mind,” states Guadams. He believes Disney is biding its time because “unlike publishers, they’re not simply seeking licenses to survive.”

The involvement of these two media powerhouses signals a pivotal moment at the intersection of AI and copyright, according to Guadams. “The fact that they are targeting Midjourney sends a clear message,” he states. Midjourney specializes in image generation exclusively, making it relatively small compared to major AI corporations. “This acts as a warning to larger entities, urging them to implement stronger protective measures.”

While many major AI companies incorporate image-generating features in their chatbots, they tend to impose stricter controls on users’ abilities to produce images featuring copyrighted characters through considerable limitations.

Disney, which generated $91 billion in revenue last year, is not seeking to profit from Midjourney. “This could act as a call for negotiations. Since AI is not going away, Disney may be setting a precedent for future business interactions,” notes Guadams.