Warner Bros sues Midjourney for alleged theft of characters in its AI image generator.

Warner Bros has initiated legal action against the artificial intelligence startup Midjourney, alleging copyright infringement. The company claims that the AI image generation platform allows users to create images and videos of characters such as Superman, Batman, and Bugs Bunny without explicit authorization.

Key points of the case

• Warner Bros alleges that Midjourney consciously participated in unlawful conduct by removing restrictions on the generation of content protected by copyright.
• The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and for Midjourney to stop future infringements.
• This case follows a similar lawsuit filed in June by Disney and Universal against Midjourney.
• Midjourney has stated that its use of works protected by copyright falls under fair use.

Details of the demand

• Presented in a federal court in Los Angeles
• Warner Bros claims that Midjourney's actions allowed it to train its AI with characters protected by copyright.
• Claims that Midjourney made a “calculated decision motivated by profit” by not offering protection to copyright owners
• Seek damages, return of benefits, and a court order against future infringements

Case Context

• Midjourney was launched in 2022 and has accumulated nearly 21 million users by September 2024.
• The company has generated over $300 million in revenue.
• The founder of Midjourney has compared the service to a search engine, arguing that it learns from existing images just as humans study paintings.

Implications for the Web3 ecosystem

This legal case raises important questions about the intersection of generative AI and blockchain technology:

• Impact on decentralized platforms: The resolution of this case could have implications for decentralized creation platforms in the Web3 space, especially those that use AI to generate content.

• NFTs and Copyright: The case highlights the complex relationship between NFTs, which often represent digital artworks, and traditional copyright. It could influence how intellectual property rights are handled in the NFT market.

• Innovation vs. IP protection: The demand highlights the tension between fostering innovation in AI and protecting established intellectual property, a relevant debate for many blockchain projects focused on content creation.

• Decentralized governance: This case could spark discussions on how DAOs and other decentralized governance structures could address intellectual property disputes in the future.

The demand highlights the growing tension between traditional media companies and AI startups as generative AI technology advances rapidly, with significant implications for the future development of the Web3 ecosystem.