Disney, Universal Slam AI Company As 'Bottomless Pit Of Plagiarism' In Scathing Lawsuit
Disney and NBCUniversal joined forces in the first lawsuit of its kind against the artificial intelligence image company Midjourney on Wednesday, accusing it of copyright infringement.
'We are bringing this action today to protect the hard work of all the artists whose work entertains and inspires us and the significant investment we make in our content,' Kimberly Harris, NBCUniversal's executive vice president, told CNBC.
The companies' lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleges that Midjourney sought 'to reap the rewards' of Disney and Universal-copyrighted characters by selling an AI image-generating service 'that functions as a virtual vending machine, generating endless unauthorized copies' of their copyrighted works.
'Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism,' the lawsuit reads. 'Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing.'
Midjourney did not immediately respond to HuffPost's request for comment.
The AI company made $300 million last year from its image service, which allowed subscribers to simply enter a text prompt to request any of the Disney or Universal characters to perform an action, according to the lawsuit. The AI then generates and displays a high-quality image of the character.
The lawsuit lists several Disney or Universal-owned characters Midjourney generated, including Shrek, Darth Vader, Thanos from the 'Avengers' series, and the Minions characters from 'Despicable Me.'
Horacio Gutierrez, chief legal and compliance officer for The Walt Disney Company, said in a statement to HuffPost that Disney's 'world-class IP is built on decades of financial investment, creativity and innovation—investments only made possible by the incentives embodied in copyright law that give creators the exclusive right to profit from their works.'
He added, 'We are bullish on the promise of AI technology and optimistic about how it can be used responsibly as a tool to further human creativity.'
The lawsuit contends that 'Midjourney could easily stop its theft and exploitation' of intellectual property since the AI service controls what copyrighted content it selects.
However, Midjourney chose not to use copyright protection measures, even when Disney and Universal sent cease-and-desist letters, according to the suit.
The lawsuit accuses Midjourney of promoting its AI tools using Disney and Universal characters, and says the AI company has already begun using such characters to train its video service. The companies are now asking for a jury trial to determine damages, which could include some of Midjourney's profits.
'Midjourney's bootlegging business model and defiance of U.S copyright law are not only an attack on Disney, Universal, and the hard-working creative community that brings the magic of movies to life, but are also a broader threat to the American motion picture industry which has created millions of jobs and contributed more than $260 billion to the nation's economy,' the lawsuit reads.
College Student Allegedly Created Undressed Images Of Classmates With AI, Then Sold Them
Top AI CEO Warns Lawmakers To Prepare For Tech To Gut Entry-Level Office Jobs
Chicago Sun-Times Faces Backlash After Promoting Fake Books In AI-Generated Summer Reading List
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Target struggles to reverse alarming customer trend amid boycotts
It is no secret that Target (TGT) has faced challenges ever since it decided to scale back a major yearslong commitment it made to its employees and customers. In January, the retail giant revealed that it will discontinue several of its diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, including advancing the careers of Black employees, implementing anti-racism training for staff members, promoting Black-owned businesses, and sourcing products from Black suppliers. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter It also withdrew its participation in the Human Rights Campaign survey, which tracks LGBTQ+ corporate policies and practices, and discontinued its three-year DEI goals. Related: Target faces another massive boycott from customers The move from Target sparked outrage from consumers, and soon after, boycotts erupted. During the first quarter of 2025, the number of customers visiting Target stores per location declined by 4.8% year-over-year, according to recent data from Target also revealed in its latest earnings report that while its comparable digital sales increased by 4.7% year-over-year, its comparable store sales decreased by 3.8% during the quarter. During an earnings call last month, Target CEO Brian Cornell said that the company is "not satisfied" with its recent performance and emphasized that it is operating in an "exceptionally challenging environment" that has harmed foot traffic and sales. "We faced several additional headwinds this quarter, including five consecutive months of declining consumer confidence, uncertainty regarding the impact of potential tariffs, and the reaction to the updates we shared on Belonging in January," said Cornell during the call. Image source: Universal Images Group via Getty Images Now, for the fourth consecutive month this year, Target's foot traffic in its store declined by 1.6% year-over-year in May, according to new data shared with TheStreet. This comes after its foot traffic shrank by 9% in February, 6.5% in March, and 3.3% in April. Target lagged behind competitors such as Walmart, Costco, and Best Buy, which all experienced increased traffic in their stores in May. This decline comes during a time when Target's reputational scores also recently took a hit, according to data from Reputation analytics firm Caliber, which Retail Brew obtained. Related: Target CEO admits a major mistake amid boycotts from customers Between January and May, Target's Integrity Score, which is based on the proportion of consumers Caliber surveyed agree with the statement "Target behaves responsibly," fell from 65 to 58. The retail giant's Leadership Score, based on the degree to which customers agreed with the statement "Target demonstrates leadership," also declined from 65 to 58. The number of consumers who agreed with the statement that they "would recommend Target to others, if given the chance" also caused Target's Recommendation Rate to dip by 24.5% between January and May. "This is concerning," Caliber CEO Shahar Silbershatz told Retail Brew. "There is a negative trend here. This is going to continue to snowball, and it's a problem." Target's CEO has recently been laser-focused on winning back customers. During the earnings call last month, Cornell said that Target will open a new Enterprise Acceleration Office, which will focus on simplifying the company's operations. In addition, Target will make organizational changes to "bring even more clarity and speed" to its business practices and strategy advancement. More Retail: Costco quietly plans to offer a convenient service for customersT-Mobile pulls the plug on generous offer, angering customersKellogg sounds alarm on unexpected shift in customer behavior He also said that Target has been working "tirelessly" to prevent potential tariff-related price increases in its stores, which threaten to scare away frugal customers. "As a company that aims to deliver great products and outstanding value, we're focused on supporting American families as they manage their budgets," said Cornell. "We have many levers to use in mitigating the impact of tariffs, and price is the very last resort." Some of those levers include negotiating with vendor partners, reevaluating assortment decisions, changing country of production, and adjusting order timing. Related: Target CEO sounds alarm on customer behavior The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Cyberattack disrupts Twin Cities grocery supply; Cub Pharmacies back online
Cyberattack disrupts Twin Cities grocery supply; Cub Pharmacies back online originally appeared on Bring Me The News. A cyberattack on United Natural Foods (UNFI), discovered late last week, has had a cascading effect on the company's grocery stores, which include Cub Foods, as well as stores that rely on UNFI for deliveries, including Whole Foods, Kowalski's, and Lunds & Byerlys in Minnesota. More than 30,000 total locations across North America rely on UNFI as a supplier, which has resulted in reports of delayed deliveries, impacting grocery store inventories. Tech Crunch reports Whole Foods employees were informed that what UNFI has described as a "cyber incident" would impact its normal delivery schedule and product availability. At Cub Foods, which was acquired by UNFI in 2018, it has meant many of its pharmacies were taken offline, unable to fill new and refill prescriptions. "Over the past few days, several of our Cub Pharmacies were unable to fulfill some of our customers' needs due to an incident that caused temporary disruptions to our business operations," a UNFI spokesperson tells Bring Me The News. However, as of June 12, the company says all of its pharmacies are back online and filling prescriptions. The interruption in service took place after UNFI took some systems offline to combat the hack, according to multiple reports. "We continue working steadily to safely restore our systems and provide the services our customers and suppliers know and expect from us," the UNFI spokesperson says. Meanwhile, systems for ordering and receiving are "gradually" being brought back online as of June 12, "with the goal of further increasing our capacity over the coming days." In the meantime, Lunds & Byerlys is working to "secure alternative sources for products typically supplied by UNFI," the company says in a statement. "While we anticipate some temporary product shortages, the impact will primarily be limited to select items in grocery, frozen and dairy as the majority of our produce, meat, seafood, deli and bakery offerings are produced in-house or sourced from other suppliers." A Whole Foods spokesperson tells Bring Me The News that it is working to restock shelves as quickly as possible, apologizing for the inconvenience any shortages may have caused customers. The Amazon-owned grocery chain has not detailed how widespread the shortages have been. UNFI says it has been investigating the incident with forensic experts. However, it has not disclosed the nature of the cyberattack and whether customer data was accessed. It has also not commented on the extent of the impact on its food deliveries, the number of stores affected, or the potential costs for the story was originally reported by Bring Me The News on Jun 12, 2025, where it first appeared.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
AMA Group Limited's (ASX:AMA) 10% loss last week hit both individual investors who own 46% as well as institutions
The considerable ownership by retail investors in AMA Group indicates that they collectively have a greater say in management and business strategy A total of 15 investors have a majority stake in the company with 51% ownership Insiders have bought recently We've found 21 US stocks that are forecast to pay a dividend yield of over 6% next year. See the full list for free. If you want to know who really controls AMA Group Limited (ASX:AMA), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. With 46% stake, retail investors possess the maximum shares in the company. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk). While the holdings of retail investors took a hit after last week's 10% price drop, institutions with their 37% holdings also suffered. Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of AMA Group, beginning with the chart below. View our latest analysis for AMA Group Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index. As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in AMA Group. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. If multiple institutions change their view on a stock at the same time, you could see the share price drop fast. It's therefore worth looking at AMA Group's earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters. AMA Group is not owned by hedge funds. TIGA Trading Pty Ltd, Asset Management Arm is currently the largest shareholder, with 10% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 6.7% and 6.0%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. Looking at the shareholder registry, we can see that 51% of the ownership is controlled by the top 15 shareholders, meaning that no single shareholder has a majority interest in the ownership. Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily. While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves. Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group. We can report that insiders do own shares in AMA Group Limited. As individuals, the insiders collectively own AU$24m worth of the AU$450m company. It is good to see some investment by insiders, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying. With a 46% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over AMA Group. While this size of ownership may not be enough to sway a policy decision in their favour, they can still make a collective impact on company policies. Our data indicates that Private Companies hold 3.5%, of the company's shares. It might be worth looking deeper into this. If related parties, such as insiders, have an interest in one of these private companies, that should be disclosed in the annual report. Private companies may also have a strategic interest in the company. We can see that public companies hold 8.0% of the AMA Group shares on issue. It's hard to say for sure but this suggests they have entwined business interests. This might be a strategic stake, so it's worth watching this space for changes in ownership. It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand AMA Group better, we need to consider many other factors. Take risks for example - AMA Group has 1 warning sign we think you should be aware of. Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company. NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Sign in to access your portfolio
