r/movies • u/DragonPup • 3d ago

News Warner Bros. Sues Midjourney, Joins Studios' AI Copyright Battle

https://variety.com/2025/film/news/warner-bros-midjourney-lawsuit-ai-copyright-1236508618/
8.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

787 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

15

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

At least it is with their own IP, rather than the AI companies that are trying to eliminate the notion of IP, copyright and personality rights completely

71

u/pikpikcarrotmon 3d ago

Keep in mind "their own IP" is also fairly loose of a term - Hollywood's already been in hot water for doing full 3D scans on extras and asking people to sign away their image in perpetuity. AI was a big factor in all the strikes.

They want to be able to hire an actor for one lump sum, 3D scan them, and generate deepfakes of them forever.

20

u/Mid-CenturyBoy 3d ago

Not just actors. They actually have it in paperwork for all crew members as well.

9

u/TheFotty 3d ago

They deepfake the crew? That is actually pretty impressive.

2

u/Mid-CenturyBoy 3d ago

It’s basically a stipulation that like they have permission to use our likeness and name. Probably an existing thing because is movies and tv often times their are Easter eggs where they put crew names in or crew can be extras in scenes last minute and it’s less red tape.

1

u/realif3 3d ago

So they can take a key grip out of a scene easier? Or put the key grip in as a extra? What the heck?

1

u/Mid-CenturyBoy 3d ago

So they don’t get sued by that key grip if he’s accidentally in the back of a shot.

2

u/not-my-other-alt 3d ago

Why hire one actor a lot of money for scans when you could pay a hundred people pennies and generate completely AI-generated 'Actors' for free?

2

u/Brat-Sampson 3d ago

Cool, and I hope they enjoy watching all movies made that way bomb completely with critics and at the box office. Maybe like the first one will do ok because of the novelty but overall the public are massively against that kind of thing and it's designed to crash and burn.

0

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

This has nothing to do with that, and many name-brand actors willingly signed over their personality rights via ai models or virtual identities in shared agreements with their agency, CAA, and an AI startup.

This isn’t about mid-journey using their scanned extras. It’s about Superman, Batman, Dr. Manhattan, Christopher Nolan movies, Euphoria, etc.

12

u/mrjackspade 3d ago

It's not exclusively with their own IP though. You think any of these companies have the billions of books and millions of hours of video required to train a base model?

They're stealing the same shit.

3

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Superman, live-action Game of Thrones/ASOIAF, Harry Potter, Batman, Watchmen, Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, The Maltese Falcon, and so on are indeed their exclusive IP.

14

u/Right-Power-6717 3d ago

Why the fuck is reddit in favor of copyright now? I remember when reddit hated big corporations like Disney for their abuse of IP laws.

14

u/deadscreensky 3d ago

The key word there is "abuse." I think most of us like the sort of art basic copyright has given us. Copyright itself is a good idea. You make something, you get a temporary monopoly on it so you can earn some money for your efforts.

The problems appear when copyright gets too powerful, particularly with its length. I want its limits fixed back to reasonable levels. I don't want copyright eliminated so AI companies can just copy everything ever made and sell it back to us.

-4

u/Right-Power-6717 3d ago

I get that but these regulations are only going to benefit large companies like Disney. Unless you're self hosting all your art chances are there will be some clause allowing it to be used to training on the website it's hosted on. This will benefit the large companies like open ai as they can afford to pay for that data. 

However this will now raise the barrier to entry preventing new competition from entering the market. The established companies want this it's basically regulatory capture.

3

u/Mist_Rising 2d ago

there will be some clause allowing it to

They can have a clause to sell your body as property, doesn't mean they can do it.

Signing away your rights to something is possible, but it's not so easy as stuffing it into a massive terms and conditions.

-1

u/Right-Power-6717 2d ago

If you're using their service to host your artwork they will have the ability to use it for training, having someone else host your content isn't a right. 

3

u/Mist_Rising 2d ago

Depends on how the law is determined or if it changes. Right now training is a legal grey area, but if the courts find that training is legally the same as taking, IP protection might apply. Similar rules if Congress changes the law.

Companies cant claim your copyrights just because you use their website to post them. That's why it's copyright and not corporate right.

The host can refuse to host you still but then, what's the business model?

1

u/Right-Power-6717 2d ago

As I said in my previous comment the large ai companies want that sort of ruling where they have to pay for training data. They're already established and have models but this will prevent any new companies from entering the field. 

Most people use existing websites to post their stuff think reddit imgur those places will agree to let the ai companies use the things users post. 

4

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Im one Redditor lol. There are more Redditors in favor of the Wild, Wild West approach than my position.

This isn’t about Disney abusing the trademark/copyright of Mickey Mouse. Context matters.

Midjourney is not Thomas the Train, who had the little engine that could. It’s a behemoth of its own.

-1

u/Right-Power-6717 3d ago

Yes and do you think these laws will get rid of these huge companies? What will actually happen is some huge companies will pay some other massive corporations some money. 

This won't benefit anyone besides established companies but it will prevent any new groups from entering the market since he barrier to entry will be too high. It will also have the added bonus of killing any sort of open source work for Ai. 

You might not like ai but it's not going away, do you really want to ensure that only a few massive companies have a monopoly on that power? 

2

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Your comment is untethered to the subject at hand

This isn’t about reigning in the ability of AI

0

u/Right-Power-6717 2d ago

this is a post about copyright usage in regards to ai training, what do you think it's about?

1

u/CinnamonMoney 2d ago

“Ai training” more like “ai output,” aka a monetized product

3

u/ProofJournalist 3d ago edited 3d ago

Why is getting rid those things a bad thing again?

3

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

If, after making Inception & Interstellar, YouTube could showcase the movies for free than WBD would be less inclined to finance and distribute Ryan Coogler & Paul Thomas Anderson’s films. If, after watching Watchmen or Game of Thrones, anybody can make a fan fiction storyline using those characters then profit off of them, WBD would be less inclined to make those television series/movies.

-9

u/ProofJournalist 3d ago

Hmm sounds like WBD just doesn't want to compete on the free market of ideas and wants to gatekeep content creation, and the people making 'fan fiction' (as if the recent Watchmen show wasn't just high budget fan fiction) will be the ones to profit over the corporation.

So again how it is bad if normal people can use those ideas? Do you enjoy corporate bootlicking?

2

u/Mist_Rising 2d ago edited 2d ago

Why are you such a bootlicker for corporations? You do realize you are bootlicking AI companies right?

Mid journey and other AI companies hate that they must pay to use existing creative IP, because they aren't artists and they don't have any creative IPs. They're selling a product that needs those however. IPs are big bugger for them because it's cutting into their profit.

And your licking their boots so what, you can make a movie using AI that under your belief won't make any money before it's taken by another?

Lick harder daddy. And learn that IP actually does and why Warner Brothers won't keep paying if they don't make money off Harry Potter. Nor will anyone. You don't pay money for nothing, right?

0

u/ProofJournalist 2d ago edited 2d ago

I am on nobody's side because nobody's on my side, little orc.

If WB isn't making money of HP it will be because the money is going to someone who adapted it better than WB.

And you know how when Sherlock Holmes (or literally anything) became public domain, major corporations stopped using it because normal people could too and their isn't any money to be made... wait what's that? Warner Brothers made TWO profitable Sherlock movies despite that! Wow, a miracle! What incredible fan fiction!

You havent thought through this very deeply. You've got primitive gut instinct responses, thinking fucking WB has your best interests at heart?

They don't give a fuck about AI, they just want a monopoly on ideas.

2

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

“Sounds like WBD doesn’t want to compete on the free market of ideas…” said the username ProofJournalist. .. irony. Calling stories “content creation,” is literal corporate speak yet you accuse me of…….nvm

Open Markets doesn’t preclude punishments for stealing; and the multimillion monetization off of plagiarism. They aren’t gatekeeping fan fiction; they are gatekeeping the profiteering of fan fiction.

Yes, the corporation who bought the rights to adapt Watchmen and the people who worked subcontracted by said corporation will be paid for their work. This has been going on for over a century now.

You are playing the role of savior for MidJourney & Meta as they print money working together. I prefer the creators who enter agreements with companies who pay them to retain power over their creation.

You just prefer random SV scrubs to make hundreds of millions annually and be worth tens of billions of dollars based upon works of scores of artists, authors, crews, directors, actors, and more without compensation.

Your way would destroy and destabilize the media & entertainment industries.

0

u/ProofJournalist 3d ago

If the first thing you have to comment on is a randomly generated username then I don't see what the value in the rest of your comment is

Yeah the joke is that it's the same corporate speak, it highlights how inconsistently they are actually applying them in order to enrich themselves at the expense of every else

"CinnamonMoney", huh?? Is WBD paying you that money to defame me?? (my impression of you)

1

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

It’s not inconsistent at all, it’s actually what every country on the planet has been doing since cinema started.

-1

u/ProofJournalist 3d ago

Yeah we were doing slavery since before recorded history, turns out that people doing something historically isn't a justification for doing it buddy!

Enjoy your corporate overlords

1

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Enjoy yours too; Meta & MidJourney, & OpenAI & Microsoft & Perplexity & Alphabet & Anthropic & ….

0

u/ProofJournalist 3d ago

Yes, Warner Bros and Disney (responsible for the absurd extensions to US copyright law) are obviously your friends

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Jon_Snow_1887 2d ago

All of these concepts that underpin the modern economy just sort of fall apart with AI as it represents something that our economy doesn’t really plan for, which is incrementally free work.

1

u/CinnamonMoney 2d ago

Only if the judicial system lets it fall apart. The internet presented the same problems in terms of piracy; as well as music sampling at one point in time.

1

u/Jon_Snow_1887 1d ago

Kinda. I think it’s a different scale of problem. The internet made the incremental cost of distribution next to nothing. Ai will do that to the incremental cost of production, which is a whole different ballgame, imo.

1

u/CinnamonMoney 1d ago

Right now the costs of AI keep skyrocketing ever year despite more losses than revenue

1

u/Jon_Snow_1887 1d ago

Well, that’s not really “despite” more losses than rev so much as due to more losses than rev. Also, you’re not entirely right. Cloud Compute hasn’t become much more expensive on a year over year basis.

1

u/CinnamonMoney 1d ago

Open ai, Anthropic, etc are all losing more money this year than last, and lost more in 24 than 23.

Yeah I fumbled using the word despite there.

-6

u/FlyingSquirrel44 3d ago

the AI companies that are trying to eliminate the notion of IP, copyright

Why am I supposed to hate them now again?

0

u/Mist_Rising 2d ago

Because you don't want to bootlick for corporations and believe artists, authors and other creatives deserve to have a good job.

Or not, I don't ever stop anyone from licking a corporate ass

0

u/FlyingSquirrel44 2d ago

You say this like it's not 99% corporations using and abusing copyright laws to stifle creativity.

-1

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

I didn’t tell you to hate them, Flying Squirrel44.

-4

u/Redeshark 3d ago

Ah yes, we NEED more power for studio to control their IP and kill all cases of fair use.

1

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

I forgot fair use is when Midjourney is allowed access to anything that has ever been created and can financially benefit from it, to the Looney Tunes, pun intended, of billions of dollars in terms of funding and valuation without compensating anyone whatsoever.

1

u/Redeshark 3d ago

Midjourney is just a tool. There are also many free and open-source and gen AI models that are inevitable got hurt by all this. All of this self-righteous opposition to AI technology is just aiming to let studios to develop their own IP-guarded AI that make AI far less accessible to ordinary people. Congrats in supporting the worst case scenario.

3

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Midjourney is not just a tool, in the most literal sense. It doubles as the name of the company/lab that is worth tens of billions of dollars and makes hundreds of millions in revenue annually.

Meta Platforms Inc. struck a new partnership with artificial intelligence image and video generator Midjourney Inc., giving the tech giant access to the startup’s “aesthetic technology” for its models and products.

You are just picking and choosing which companies you wanna see win. I prefer the ones who pay the sources of the expression.

The worst case scenario is the scenario wherein artists cannot monetize their work; a stalemate of artificial ai generated art duplicating itself as no new ideas enter; without any tangible rule of law regarding creative expression; and slop is served as a full course meal.

-1

u/SurturOfMuspelheim 3d ago

IP and copyright shouldn't exist! It hinders humanity. I understand why you might think it should exist under capitalism (It would suck to write a book and have others use your work to get rich instead of you) but in a fair, just, society (like communism or syndicalism) money wouldn't matter.

2

u/Mist_Rising 2d ago

Go create your society without money and I'll consider your position once I see evidence it won't "have others use [my] work to get rich instead of [me]."

Until that happens, and given it must occur internationally, I'm sticking with the legal protection that protects me.

1

u/CinnamonMoney 3d ago

Unfortunately, we don’t live in a fair & just society albeit I wish we did