A stipulated order posted on 6 October 2026 in the Hollywood studios' copyright case against Midjourney says the AI company will transfer the video datasets it used to train its models to the plaintiffs. The order is an agreement between the parties, signed off in court, rather than a ruling forced on Midjourney. The post that reported it gives no volumes, file format or deadline for the handover, and points readers to the order itself for detail.
“If Plaintiffs are doing the very thing they seek to punish, that evidence goes to the heart of Midjourney’s fair use and unclean hands defenses.”
Bobby Ghajar, Midjourney attorney, in court filings reported by VP Land · vp-land.com ↗
The plaintiffs are Disney, Universal and Warner Bros., whose suits are consolidated before Judge John Kronstadt in the Central District of California. Disney and Universal filed in June 2025, and Warner Bros. followed that September, citing characters such as Batman and Superman. Midjourney launched its video feature in June 2025, so the video datasets at issue come from a product that is barely a year old.
The studios say the case is simply about Midjourney copying and distributing their films and shows. Midjourney's line is that the studios use comparable AI tools inside their own businesses, which it says shows that training on unlicensed material is normal practice and bears on its fair use and unclean hands defences.
Studio logos montage used by ComingSoon for the earlier discovery dispute (background only)
Disney, Warner Bros., Universal Pictures · Image: ComingSoon.net
Midjourney's lawyer, Bobby Ghajar, has framed the point as one of evidence: if the studios do what they accuse Midjourney of doing, that material is central to the defence. The studios' lawyer, David Singer, answered that the case concerns only copying, distribution, public display and derivative works made from their films and shows.
That argument has already caused friction over discovery. In June 2026 a magistrate judge restricted Midjourney's requests to the studios' consumer-facing AI products. Midjourney then asked Judge Kronstadt in early July to overturn that limit. Taken together, the dispute now runs on two tracks: Midjourney gives up what it trained on, and it keeps pushing for a look at what the studios do with AI. How the objection to the magistrate's limit was resolved is not covered in the reporting used here, and neither is any timetable for what follows the data transfer.