Midjourney Seeks Studio AI Records Beyond Consumer-Facing Images

Midjourney is trying to widen discovery in its copyright fight with Hollywood studios, asking a court to make the studios disclose more about how they use generative AI behind the scenes.

The filing gives the image-generation company a procedural way to challenge the studios' market-harm argument.

Disney, Universal and Warner Bros. are accusing Midjourney of copyright infringement, while Midjourney says the studios should not be allowed to limit disclosure to only AI outputs that reached consumers.

Midjourney Challenges The Consumer-Facing Limit

The dispute concerns what Disney, Universal and Warner Bros. must produce during discovery.

TechCrunch reported that a judge previously required information about the studios' generative AI usage only when it led to "consumer-facing" videos and images.

Midjourney's latest filing asks the court to overturn that limitation.

The company argues that the current scope lets the studios choose documents that support their market-harm claims while withholding documents that could support Midjourney's defence.

The filing says the withheld material could show whether the studios use AI internally for storyboarding, ideation or other production-related work.

Midjourney argues that such evidence could bear on industry custom and on whether similar uses of copyrighted material are happening inside the studios.

Studios Say Internal AI Use Is Not Relevant

The studios argue that internal generative AI use is not relevant to their claims unless it produced consumer-facing videos or images.

Their position keeps the discovery fight focused on uses that may have reached audiences rather than every experiment, workflow or internal creative tool.

Midjourney says that distinction is too narrow because the studios are claiming harm to markets for licensed characters and creative works.

In its framing, internal use could still affect arguments about fair use, market substitution and whether AI-assisted workflows are becoming normal in entertainment production.

The filing does not resolve the underlying infringement case.

Disney and Universal sued Midjourney over image-generation outputs involving characters such as Bart Simpson and Darth Vader, and Warner Bros. later brought its own case against the company.

Fair-Use Fight Still Depends On Court Records

Midjourney says fair use protects the way it trains image models with copyrighted-character material.

The studios reject that position and say the company's image models can generate protected characters without authorisation.

The discovery request gives both sides another evidence battle before the court reaches the core copyright questions.

If the court grants a broader production order, the studios may have to disclose more internal records about generative AI tests, tools or workflows.

If the court keeps the narrower limit, Midjourney's access to those records would stay tied to consumer-facing outputs.

Specific internal studio models, datasets, contracts, licensing terms or AI-generated works that the studios must disclose remain outside the public record.