"A Direct Confrontation with the 'Bottomless Pit of Plagiarism'—Disney & Universal Sue AI Giant Midjourney"

1. Lead: The Entertainment Titans Issue a "Final Warning"

"The Legacy of Hollywood's Golden Age" and "The Prodigy of the AI Golden Age" are now facing off in a Los Angeles courtroom. On June 11, 2025, Walt Disney and NBC Universal filed a lawsuit against generative AI image service Midjourney for copyright infringement. The complaint is 143 pages long, with approximately 1,200 pieces of evidence images attached. These include generated images reminiscent of the intellectual property of both companies, such as "Yoda wielding a lightsaber" and "Minions driving a flying car."businessinsider.com

2. What Happened—Overview of the Lawsuit (1,200 characters)

• Plaintiffs: The Walt Disney Company, NBC Universal

• Defendant: Midjourney, Inc. (San Francisco, USA)

• Points of Contention: ① Massive copying of copyrighted works during the learning phase ② Similarity of output images ③ Violation of technical restriction obligations

• Sought Remedies: Damages + Permanent Injunction

In the complaint, Disney and Universal mock Midjourney as a "virtual vending machine," claiming it diluted the economic value of their franchises by selling countless characters at zero cost. In response, Midjourney CEO David Holz told the BBC, "The model is a 'creative tool,' and the act of learning is synonymous with human inspiration."x.com

3. Background—Growing Tension Between Generative AI and Copyright (1,300 characters)

Like OpenAI's DALL·E and Stability AI's Stable Diffusion, Midjourney learns from a vast array of images, videos, and art to generate new images from text input. Concerns that "AI is devouring works" began spreading among creators around 2022, and since 2023, companies like Getty Images, The New York Times, and Universal Music have successively sued AI companies.time.com

4. Deciphering the Complaint—The Rhetoric of a "Bottomless Pit" (1,400 characters)

The most striking expression in the complaint is "bottomless pit of plagiarism." This is an intentional rhetoric to position AI platforms not as mere "passive tools" but as "active perpetrators." According to the Associated Press, the plaintiffs accuse that "Midjourney's business model relies on illegal copying of copyrighted works, without even implementing technical filters."apnews.com

5. Reactions on Social Media—Welcome, Ridicule, and Fear (1,600 characters)

• "This will put a stop to AI's rampage" (News account @NBCNews)x.com

• "Just reading the complaint is entertaining. The passion in Hollywood is incredible." (Individual user @RiotCarasee)x.com

• "It's a weak precedent. Only investors are shaken." (Stability AI founder Emad Mostaque)x.com

• "Disney's 'dark stomach' bares its fangs at AI" (Pop culture critic @tendermiasma)x.com

On X (formerly Twitter), "#MidjourneyLawsuit" and "#DisneyVsAI" trended, with over 350,000 related posts in 24 hours. In the Japanese-speaking world, debates heated up with comments like "AI regulation is inevitable" and "What will happen to derivative works?"

6. Ripples in Japan—The Anime and Manga Industry Cannot Stay Silent (1,400 characters)

Japan is a powerhouse of character IPs like anime and manga, and suspicions of "tracing and plagiarism" by generative AI are endless. Associate Professor Maiko Suenaga of the University of Tokyo Graduate School (Intellectual Property Law) points out, "Domestic companies will follow American precedents and accelerate moves to demand comprehensive licensing agreements from AI companies." Technology media TechnoEdge reports, "If Disney's victory is confirmed, Japanese companies will also consider similar lawsuits."techno-edge.net

7. Legal Issues—Fair Use vs. Japan's "Quotation" Provisions (1,300 characters)

In the U.S., the four-factor test of "fair use" is key, but whether mass copying during the learning phase constitutes "transformative use" is a point of contention. Meanwhile, Article 30-4 of Japan's Copyright Act (Reproduction for Information Analysis) allows certain learning uses under the condition of "non-enjoyment," but if the output of generative AI resembles the original work, there is room for infringement to be established.

8. The Struggle Between Creators and Companies: Exploring Sustainable AI Utilization Models (1,300 words)

• License Model: Profit sharing with data providers like Shutterstock × OpenAI

• Metadata Model: Mandating "source trace" on generated products with revenue sharing

• Platform Regulation Model: Gradual restriction of generative AI materials by Discord and Pixiv

Each model is in the process of seeking a balance between "cost expansion" and "freedom of expression."

9. Conclusion: AI and Copyright, Moving to the Next Stage (400 words)

The lawsuit initiated by Disney and Universal has highlighted the massive rift lurking beneath the surface of the generative AI industry and the creator economy. While it may take years for a verdict to be reached, any interim settlements or injunctions could force AI services worldwide to immediately review their training data. It is now the time for Japanese IP holders and startups to construct a new contract of "creation and rights."