In June, a magistrate judge limited Midjourney’s ability to obtain discovery from the studios about their AI use, saying the studios would have to turn over information only about “consumer-facing” AI applications.
Midjourney’s lawyers filed a motion this week urging Judge John Kronstadt to overturn that decision, arguing that the studios should have to divulge more much about how AI is used behind the scenes.
“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,” wrote Midjourney’s attorney, Bobby Ghajar.
Midjourney wants the three studios to reveal its AI business plans, research reports, training datasets, model weights, and other data that would show how they use AI tools to create and market movies and TV shows. The company has also sought the studios’ board meeting presentations about AI.
The studios agreed to turn over information only about consumer-facing AI applications — but not about any internal AI tools.
Midjourney’s motion argues that it should also be allowed to dig deeper.
The studios’ lead attorney, David Singer, has previously argued that Midjourney is seeking to go on a “fishing expedition” to distract from its own misconduct.