In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing battle between Hollywood and Silicon Valley, Warner Bros Discovery has filed a sweeping lawsuit against artificial intelligence company Midjourney, accusing the San Francisco-based startup of systematic copyright infringement. The legal action, lodged on September 4, 2025, in a Los Angeles federal court, alleges that Midjourney has knowingly enabled millions of users to generate unauthorized images and videos of Warner Bros’ most beloved and lucrative characters—including Superman, Batman, Bugs Bunny, Wonder Woman, Scooby-Doo, and many more—without permission.
The complaint, which follows closely on the heels of similar lawsuits by Disney and Universal earlier this year, paints a picture of a calculated and profit-driven tech firm that has chosen to ignore copyright safeguards in pursuit of rapid growth and hefty profits. Warner Bros claims that Midjourney’s platform, which boasted nearly 21 million users and $300 million in revenue as of September 2024, “openly steals the studio’s works to generate images of its characters in every imaginable scene,” according to The Federal. The studio is seeking unspecified damages, disgorgement of profits, and a court order to halt further infringements.
“Midjourney has made a calculated and profit-driven decision to offer zero protection for copyright owners even though it knows about the breathtaking scope of its piracy and copyright infringement,” Warner Bros argues in its complaint, as reported by Variety. The studio’s legal team, which also represents Disney and Universal in their ongoing case against Midjourney, contends that the company is behaving as if it is “above the law,” profiting from piracy while refusing to implement even basic safeguards to protect intellectual property.
At the heart of the dispute is the allegation that Midjourney’s AI models were trained using copyrighted works owned by Warner Bros and other studios, reformatted and repurposed to allow users to create high-quality, downloadable images and videos featuring iconic characters. The complaint details how even generic prompts like “classic comic book superhero battle” can result in images that unmistakably resemble Warner Bros’ intellectual property. The system is sophisticated enough to distinguish between different versions of characters—producing one style when prompted with “The Joker, DC comic book character,” and another when asked for “The Joker, 1970s animated cartoon character.”
Warner Bros maintains that such capabilities are a major attraction for Midjourney’s subscriber base, and that the company’s decision to remove prior restrictions on generating videos of copyrighted characters was a deliberate move to increase engagement and profits. “Midjourney thinks it is above the law,” the lawsuit states. “Without any consent or authorization by Warner Bros Discovery, Midjourney brazenly dispenses Warner Bros Discovery’s intellectual property as if it were its own.”
The complaint also notes that Midjourney previously had policies in place to block subscribers from generating videos based on copyrighted images, but abruptly lifted those restrictions last month, touting the change as a service improvement. Warner Bros sees this as evidence of knowing misconduct, arguing that Midjourney is fully aware of the legal risks but has chosen to prioritize its bottom line.
The stakes are high, not just for Warner Bros but for the entire entertainment industry. The Motion Picture Association (MPA), which represents major Hollywood studios, weighed in with a statement of support for Warner Bros and its peers. “We remain concerned that copyright infringement, left unchecked, threatens the entire American motion picture industry, which supports over 2 million jobs in all 50 states and drives countless economic, social, and cultural benefits,” the MPA said, according to Variety.
This latest lawsuit is part of a growing wave of legal challenges facing AI companies over the alleged misuse of copyrighted materials. In June 2025, Disney and Universal filed their own case against Midjourney, citing infringement of characters such as Bart Simpson, Shrek, Ariel from The Little Mermaid, and Darth Vader. In both cases, the studios argue that Midjourney could continue to offer its service while implementing technical safeguards to prevent the reproduction of copyrighted characters—but that the company has deliberately chosen not to do so.
Midjourney, for its part, has pushed back vigorously. In a filing related to the Disney and Universal case, the company argued that “copyright law does not confer absolute control over the use of copyrighted works.” It claims that training generative AI models on copyrighted materials constitutes fair use, which it says is essential to “ensure the free flow of ideas and information.” The company’s founder, David Holz, has previously compared the service to a search engine, suggesting that it learns from existing images much like an artist studies a painting to improve their technique.
Midjourney’s legal team also points out that its platform’s terms of service explicitly forbid users from violating others’ intellectual property rights, and they have accused the studios of hypocrisy—cracking down on AI companies for using “industry standard” practices while themselves seeking to profit from AI technologies. Nonetheless, the lawsuit alleges that users can easily prompt the service to generate infringing images and videos of characters like the Joker, Flash, Scooby-Doo, and many others, often with just a few words.
The complaint goes further, warning that Midjourney’s recent expansion into video generation and its launch of a 24/7 streaming channel on its website and YouTube suggest an intent to move into traditional television or streaming markets—potentially posing a major competitive threat to the studios. The lawsuit seeks not only monetary damages but also an injunction to block Midjourney from further infringing on Warner Bros’ copyrights.
For Warner Bros, the issue is not just about lost revenue but about protecting the creative vision and investments that underpin the studio’s success. “The heart of what we do is develop stories and characters to entertain our audiences, bringing to life the vision and passion of our creative partners,” a spokesperson for Warner Bros Discovery said. “We filed this suit to protect our content, our partners, and our investment.”
Meanwhile, the broader debate over AI and copyright law shows no signs of abating. In recent years, authors, news organizations, record labels, and artists have all accused AI companies of using their materials without permission. Midjourney itself was previously targeted by a group of ten artists, who in 2024 were allowed by a federal judge to continue their infringement lawsuit against the company and others, alleging that their copyrighted artwork was scraped and stored without consent.
As the legal battles intensify, the outcome of Warner Bros’ lawsuit against Midjourney could set a precedent with far-reaching implications for the future of AI, entertainment, and intellectual property. Both sides are digging in for what promises to be a landmark fight—one that will test the boundaries of copyright law in the age of artificial intelligence.
Whatever the verdict, the case highlights the urgent need for clearer rules and mutual understanding between the creative industries and the rapidly evolving world of AI technology.
