Warner Bros is suing synthetic intelligence firm Midjourney for copyright infringement, alleging that the startup permits its tens of millions of subscribers to create AI-generated photographs and movies of copyrighted characters like Superman and Bugs Bunny.
It’s the third large Hollywood studio to sue Midjourney in Los Angeles federal courtroom after Disney and Universal filed a joint lawsuit in June.
Midjourney, based mostly in San Francisco, did not instantly reply to a request for remark.
The lawsuit alleges Midjourney educated its AI system on “illegal copies” of Warner Bros. works and encourages its customers to select iconic characters like Batman, Wonder Woman, Scooby-Doo or the Powerpuff Girls and create downloaded photographs and movies of these characters in “every imaginable scene.”
Even a generic immediate for the AI device to supply a “classic comic book superhero battle” will generate high-quality photographs of DC Studios figures corresponding to Superman, Batman and Flash, based on the lawsuit.
Warner Bros. says “Midjourney thinks it is above the law” and “could easily stop its theft and exploitation” of mental property in the identical means it units limits on violence or nudity.
The lawsuit alleges Midjourney’s practices create “consumer confusion regarding what is lawful and what is not lawful by misleading its subscribers to believe that Midjourney’s massive copying and the countless infringing images and videos generated by its Service are somehow authorized by Warner Bros. Discovery.”
The leisure big says it’s entitled to as much as $150,000 in damages per infringed work.
Midjourney has denied copyright infringement allegations within the Disney and Universal case, arguing in an August courtroom submitting that whereas its AI device “had to be trained on billions of publicly available images,” it did so “in order to learn visual concepts” and the way they correspond to language.
“Training a generative AI model to understand concepts by extracting statistical information embedded in copyrighted works is a quintessentially transformative fair use – a determination resoundingly supported by courts that have considered the issue,” stated Midjourney’s response, citing current courtroom rulings in lawsuits by revealed authors towards Anthropic and Facebook mum or dad Meta.
Midjourney additionally stated the onus was on its prospects to observe Midjourney’s phrases of use, which prohibit infringing mental property rights.
In a 2022 interview with The Associated Press, Midjourney CEO David Holz described his image-making service as “kind of like a search engine” pulling in a large swath of photographs from throughout the web. He in contrast copyright considerations concerning the expertise with how such legal guidelines have tailored to human creativity.
“Can a person look at somebody else’s picture and learn from it and make a similar picture?” Holz stated. “Obviously, it’s allowed for people and if it wasn’t, then it would destroy the whole professional art industry, probably the nonprofessional industry too. To the extent that AIs are learning like people, it’s sort of the same thing and if the images come out differently then it seems like it’s fine.”
© Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This materials will not be revealed, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed with out permission.