Warner Bros. Discovery Sues Midjourney Over AI Copyright

Warner Bros. Discovery Takes Midjourney to Court

Warner Bros. Discovery this week filed a copyright infringement suit against AI image and video company Midjourney, alleging the platform lets users generate copyrighted characters such as Batman, Scooby-Doo and Bugs Bunny. The studio asserts Midjourney knowingly allowed widespread infringement and offered "zero protection" for rightsholders.

This is the third major entertainment lawsuit against Midjourney following similar filings by Disney and Universal earlier this year. Warner Bros. Discovery included DC Comics, Cartoon Network and Hanna-Barbera subsidiaries in the suit and notes the company used the same law firm that represented Disney and Universal.

Key allegations in the complaint include:

• Midjourney enabled users to create images and short videos of protected characters without permission.
• The company briefly restricted its video model then lifted limits, which Warner Bros. says shows knowledge of infringement.
• Midjourney updated terms to prohibit redteaming, which Warner Bros. says impeded safety testing that could have reduced infringement.

Midjourney is one of the most popular generative image tools, letting users create visuals from text prompts. The studio argues that popularity combined with permissive controls has produced a "breathtaking" scale of piracy. Midjourney did not immediately comment on the filing.

This case lands amid wider legal uncertainty about AI training and output. Courts have reached mixed rulings: recent decisions favored Anthropic and Meta in fair use findings over training on books, while publishers and creators continue suits against other AI makers. Those outcomes show there is no bright-line rule yet.

What this means for studios, platforms and developers

Studios and platforms should not treat this as abstract litigation. The case highlights practical steps companies can take now to reduce legal and business risk.

• Audit and document training data lineage to show what sources informed a model.
• Implement continuous monitoring of generated outputs to detect resembling copyrighted characters and flag risky prompts.
• Negotiate licensing frameworks or technical guardrails (watermarks, style filters) to reduce IP exposure.

Legal outcomes will shape industry norms and product design. For now, Midjourney users should expect uninterrupted service, but companies and creators should prepare for more regulatory scrutiny, potential changes to model training practices, and contractual protections for creative works.

QuarkyByte approaches these challenges by combining technical audits with policy and business-readiness plans—helping rights holders and platforms map exposure, build governance controls, and measure the impact of AI on creative assets. The Warner Bros. Discovery v. Midjourney suit is another signal that now is the time to operationalize AI risk controls rather than wait for a court to define the rules.