Meta users think they're chatting privately with AI. Instead, they're broadcasting medical questions, legal troubles, and relationship problems to the world through a public feed that many don't realize exists.
Good Morning from San Francisco, Meta just dropped $14.8 billion for half of Scale AI 💸. That's Silicon
Meta just paid $15 billion for a 49% stake in Scale AI after its own models flopped. CEO Alexandr Wang gets control while leading Meta's new "superintelligence" team. The deal reveals how desperate big tech has become to acquire AI talent at any cost.
Disney and Universal sued AI company Midjourney for using their characters without permission to train image generators. It's the first major Hollywood lawsuit against generative AI, testing whether copyright law protects creators in the age of artificial intelligence.
💡 TL;DR - The 30 Seconds Version
⚖️ Disney and Universal filed the first major Hollywood lawsuit against AI company Midjourney for copyright infringement on Wednesday.
📊 The 110-page lawsuit shows dozens of AI-generated copies of characters like Darth Vader, Elsa, and the Minions created by Midjourney's millions of users.
🤝 Studios claim they tried to negotiate with Midjourney first, but the AI company refused to stop using copyrighted characters unlike other platforms.
🎭 The lawsuit targets the platform, not individual users, and calls Midjourney "a bottomless pit of plagiarism" that helped itself to countless copyrighted works.
🌍 This case could force AI companies to pay licensing fees for training data instead of scraping copyrighted content for free.
🚀 The lawsuit sends a warning to the entire AI industry that Hollywood's biggest players won't tolerate unauthorized use of their most valuable assets.
Disney and Universal filed a 110-page lawsuit against Midjourney on Wednesday, marking the first time major Hollywood studios have sued a generative AI company for copyright infringement.
The entertainment giants accuse the AI image generator of using their copyrighted characters without permission to train its software. Midjourney then lets millions of users create images that copy famous characters like Darth Vader, Elsa from Frozen, the Minions, and Shrek.
The lawsuit calls Midjourney "the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism." It includes dozens of side-by-side comparisons showing original Disney and Universal characters next to AI-generated copies that look remarkably similar.
Midjourney, founded in 2022, trains its AI by scraping images from across the internet. The company doesn't ask permission or pay creators for using their work. This practice has already triggered lawsuits from authors, artists, record labels, and news organizations.
The New York Times is suing OpenAI and Microsoft over similar issues. But Disney and Universal represent the biggest names in Hollywood to join the legal fight.
Creative workers have criticized studios for staying silent while AI companies used their content for free. Writers Guild President Meredith Stiehm told The Los Angeles Times in February that studios have "not protested the theft of this copyrighted material by the AI companies, and it's a capitulation on their part to still be on the sidelines."
The lawsuit suggests Disney and Universal were building their case rather than ignoring the problem. They claim they tried to negotiate with Midjourney before filing suit, but the AI company refused to take their concerns seriously.
Other AI platforms agreed to implement measures to stop using copyrighted content without permission. Midjourney did not. Instead, the company "continued to release new versions of its Image Service, which, according to Midjourney's founder and CEO, have even higher quality infringing images," the lawsuit states. Midjourney "is focused on its own bottom line and ignored Plaintiffs' demands," according to the court filing.
The lawsuit reads like a warning shot to the entire AI industry. Disney and Universal own two of the largest collections of intellectual property in entertainment. Their legal action could encourage other studios to follow suit.
This approach mirrors tactics in other creative industries. More than dozen news companies teamed up to sue AI company Cohere in February. The News Media Alliance, representing thousands of news organizations, joined that complaint.
The Motion Picture Association represents all major Hollywood studios, including Amazon, Netflix, Paramount, Sony, and Warner Bros. But these companies have different business goals and approaches to AI.
Disney's general counsel Horacio Gutierrez struck a balanced tone in the company's statement. "We are bullish on the promise of AI technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity," Gutierrez said in an email to The New York Times. "But piracy is piracy, and the fact that it's done by an AI company does not make it any less infringing."
NBCUniversal's general counsel Kim Harris echoed this sentiment in a separate email to The New York Times: "We are bringing this action today to protect the hard work of all the artists whose work entertains and inspires us and the significant investment we make in our content. Theft is theft regardless of the technology used, and this action involves blatant infringement of our copyrights."
Both companies emphasized protecting the artists whose work creates their content and the massive investments they make in developing characters and stories.
The lawsuit targets platforms that create and distribute copies of copyrighted content, not the users who generate those images. This strategy could shape how courts view AI copyright cases going forward.
Midjourney has millions of registered users who can create images with simple text prompts. The service plans to add video generation soon, which could multiply the copyright concerns.
The case will test whether existing copyright law applies to AI training and output. AI companies argue their use of copyrighted material falls under fair use provisions. Rights holders disagree.
This lawsuit represents a turning point in how traditional media companies approach AI. Rather than trying to stop the technology, they're demanding fair compensation and respect for their intellectual property.
The timing matters too. AI image generation has improved dramatically in the past two years. What started as obviously artificial pictures now produces images that can fool casual observers.
Disney and Universal characters are particularly valuable because they're instantly recognizable and emotionally resonant. Parents buy products featuring these characters for their children. Businesses license them for marketing campaigns. The studios invest billions creating and promoting these properties.
The lawsuit could force AI companies to change how they train their models. Some might need to pay licensing fees for copyrighted content. Others might focus on creating original training data or using only public domain materials.
The case will likely take years to resolve through the courts. But it sends a clear message that Hollywood's biggest players won't tolerate unauthorized use of their most valuable assets.
Why this matters:
Q: How much money are Disney and Universal asking for in damages?
A: The 110-page lawsuit doesn't specify a dollar amount. Copyright infringement cases can range from hundreds of thousands to millions per work infringed. With dozens of characters involved, damages could reach tens of millions if Disney and Universal win.
Q: What exactly does Midjourney do that other AI companies don't?
A: Unlike other AI platforms that agreed to block copyrighted content, Midjourney refused to negotiate. The lawsuit claims Midjourney actually made the problem worse by releasing newer versions that create "even higher quality infringing images" of copyrighted characters.
Q: How many people use Midjourney to create these images?
A: Midjourney has millions of registered users who can create images with simple text prompts. The company was founded in 2022 and plans to add video generation soon, which could multiply the copyright concerns beyond still images.
Q: Are regular users who create AI images going to get sued too?
A: No. The lawsuit targets platforms that create and distribute copies of copyrighted content, not individual users. Disney and Universal are going after Midjourney as the company, not the millions of people who use its service.
Q: Which other AI companies could face similar lawsuits?
A: Any AI company that trains on copyrighted content without permission could be at risk. The lawsuit reads like a warning to the entire industry. Other major targets could include Stable Diffusion, DALL-E, or newer image generators that produce copyrighted characters.
Meta users think they're chatting privately with AI. Instead, they're broadcasting medical questions, legal troubles, and relationship problems to the world through a public feed that many don't realize exists.
OpenAI cut its o3 model prices 80% while launching o3-pro—a reasoning AI that takes over 3 minutes to respond but outperforms rivals on complex tasks. The move intensifies AI pricing wars and splits the market between fast chat models and slow thinking ones.
Publishers built their business on Google sending them traffic. Now Google's AI answers questions directly, cutting out the middleman. Major news sites lost half their visitors in three years. Some adapt with new revenue models, others fight with lawsuits.
Meta spent months claiming its AI was "crushing it" while losing most of its research team. Now Zuckerberg is spending $10+ billion to fix problems he said didn't exist. The crisis shows how AI forces companies to admit failure or fall behind.
Get tomorrow's intel today. Join the clever kids' club. Free forever.
