-
Disney attempts to salvage its contributory infringement claim v. Midjourney on inducement theory, post-Cox Communications
Read more: Disney attempts to salvage its contributory infringement claim v. Midjourney on inducement theory, post-Cox CommunicationsThe fallout from the Supreme Court’s decision in Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment continues. In response to Midjourney’s motion for a judgment on the pleadings that Disney’s contributory infringement claim based on “knowledge and material contribution” fails as a matter of law under Cox, Disney says its complaint also alleges an inducement theory that…
-
Citing Supreme Court’s decision in Cox, Midjourney asks for judgment on the pleadings that Disney’s contributory infringement claim fails as a matter of law
Read more: Citing Supreme Court’s decision in Cox, Midjourney asks for judgment on the pleadings that Disney’s contributory infringement claim fails as a matter of lawThe fallout from the Supreme Court’s decision in Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment continues. Following OpenAI’s successful strategy, Midjourney has asked the court for judgment on the pleadings and a ruling that Disney’s claim of contributory infringement fails as a matter of law. Judge Kronstadt presides. Excerpt: DOWNLOAD MIDJOURNEY’S MOTION: Related Story:
-
Magistrate Judge Richlin mostly denies Midjourney’s motion to compel discovery re: Disney’s own use or development of AI and prompts used to generate examples from Midjourney not used in Complaint
Read more: Magistrate Judge Richlin mostly denies Midjourney’s motion to compel discovery re: Disney’s own use or development of AI and prompts used to generate examples from Midjourney not used in ComplaintMagistrate Judge Richlin mostly denied Midjourney’s attempt to get discovery of Disney’s own use or development of AI. Judge Richlin found such use irrelevant to Midjourney’s fair use defense, citing a similar ruling in the In re OpenAI Copyright Infringement Litigation. The judge also ruled that Disney’s prompts used to generate allegedly infringing outputs on…
-
Hollywood studios roiled by Seedance AI video pitting Brad Pitt v. Tom Cruise
Read more: Hollywood studios roiled by Seedance AI video pitting Brad Pitt v. Tom CruiseSimilar to what happened when Midjourney released its new video generator that enabled users to create videos with Hollywood studios’ animated characters, the video generator Seedance, owned by Chinese-based Bytedance, has roiled Hollywood studios. The AI-generated video that caused the greatest uproar was one pitting Brad Pitt against Tom Cruise: Disney swiftly sent a cease-and-desist…
-
Disney, Midjourney select Hon. Suzanne H. Segal as private neutral for mediation
Read more: Disney, Midjourney select Hon. Suzanne H. Segal as private neutral for mediationThe partes in Disney v. Midjourney filed their joint selection of a private neutral, the Hon. Suzanne H. Segal, the retired magistrate judge for the Central District of California who has reportedly “served as settlement judge in hundreds of cases.” A great selection. I cannot tell when the anticipated mediation will take place other than…
-
Disney strikes deal with OpenAI, including $1B stake in OpenAI and licensing of Disney characters in Sora videos
Read more: Disney strikes deal with OpenAI, including $1B stake in OpenAI and licensing of Disney characters in Sora videosFrom OpenAI’s press release: The Walt Disney Company and OpenAI have reached an agreement for Disney to become the first major content licensing partner on Sora, OpenAI’s short-form generative AI video platform, bringing these leaders in creativity and innovation together to unlock new possibilities in imaginative storytelling. As part of this new, three-year licensing agreement,…
-
Pretrial schedule in Disney v. Midjourney is set
Read more: Pretrial schedule in Disney v. Midjourney is setJudge Kronstadt issued the pretrial schedule for the Disney v. Midjourney suit. DOWNLOAD THE ORDER
-
Judge Kronstadt order for Disney v. Midjourney to private mediation, ADR Procedure No. 3 with deadline of Aug. 19, 2026
Read more: Judge Kronstadt order for Disney v. Midjourney to private mediation, ADR Procedure No. 3 with deadline of Aug. 19, 2026As the parties in Disney v. Midjourney agreed, they will at some point engage in private mediation. Judge Kronstadt set the deadline for Aug. 19, 2026. Meanwhile, the case proceeds on, consolidated with the Warner Brothers v. Midjourney case.
-
Judge Kronstadt approves consolidation of Disney’s and Warner Brothers’ suits v. Midjourney.
Read more: Judge Kronstadt approves consolidation of Disney’s and Warner Brothers’ suits v. Midjourney.Judge Kronstadt granted the stipulation to consolidate Disney’s and Warner Brothers’ suits against Midjourney. The Judge provided a detailed set of instructions on how the consolidation will unfold:
-
Judge Kronstadt consolidates Disney and Warner Brothers’ suit v. Midjourney
Read more: Judge Kronstadt consolidates Disney and Warner Brothers’ suit v. MidjourneyThe order: “ORDER RE JOINT STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES (DKT. 21 ) by Judge John A. Kronstadt. The Stipulation is APPROVED as follows: Disney Enterprises Inc. et al. v. Midjourney, Inc., Case No. 2:25-cv-05275-JAK-AJR (“Disney”) and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. et al. v. Midjourney Inc., No. 2:25-cv-08376-JAK-E (“Warner Bros.”) are CONSOLIDATED for all purposes, including…