Disney, Universal, and Warner Bros Sue Chinese AI Firm MiniMax

Hooray for Hollywood? It all depends on your viewpoint as Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Universal have filed a joint lawsuit against the Chinese company MiniMax.

The three entertainment giants claim that MiniMax’s generative AI app Hailuo is using their content without permission. Hailuo is a tool that can generate videos, AI music, and songs, which makes it a direct threat to the studios’ content creation monopoly. Rivals locking arms is rare, and that unity is exactly what makes this case interesting.

“MiniMax’s bootlegging business model and defiance of US copyright law are not only an attack on Plaintiffs 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,” the companies state in their complaint, filed in the US District Court in Los Angeles.

“MiniMax completely disregards US copyright law and treats Plaintiffs’ valuable copyrighted characters like its own,” the lawsuit adds. “MiniMax’s copyright infringement is willful and brazen.”

The AI battleground

The legal ground shifted three months ago when a federal judge in San Francisco ruled that training an AI model on copyrighted works without specific permission was not a violation of copyright law. Fair use might apply. Then came the catch.

While US District Judge William Alsup said that AI company Anthropic could assert a fair use defense against copyright claims this past summer, he drew a hard line on how companies get their data. It was not okay for Anthropic to have downloaded millions of pirated copies of books from the internet, and the judge ordered a separate trial on Anthropic’s storage of pirated books.

That split left a legal minefield. The message is blunt, downloading source copies from pirate sites that could have been lawfully purchased was considered not reasonably necessary. How you get your data matters as much as how you use it.

Companies might argue fair use for training, yet they face massive liability if they cannot show lawful acquisition. The ruling may set a precedent for other copyright cases involving AI training, turning each new decision into an industry pivot point.

What this means for AI companies

The financial stakes are brutal. Earlier this month, Anthropic agreed to pay $1.5 billion to settle a class-action lawsuit by book authors, proof that one bad case can flip a company overnight.

Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, and Universal are not just targeting Hailuo, they are mapping a playbook for coordinated strikes across the sector. Earlier this year, Disney and Universal filed a copyright infringement lawsuit against Midjourney, a warning shot at anyone generating visual content. If your code makes images, music, or video, expect heat.

The ripple effects are global. Seven months ago, The Beijing Internet Court found that AI-created artwork can be protected by copyright laws, and the Guangzhou Internet Court sided with the plaintiff in a landmark case that outlined three key duties of AI service providers that could become the global norm.

The complaints generally claim that AI companies illegally train various large language models on copyrighted content from media companies, and studios are backing those claims with deep resources across multiple courts.

Lawsuits everywhere

This latest news from Hollywood follows on from other similar activities. It’s not just the entertainment industry that is being affected by AI.

This month, Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster filed lawsuits against Perplexity, accusing the AI startup of systematically stealing their copyrighted content without permission.

Apple was also hit with a lawsuit this month over alleged AI training with pirated books. Two authors say Apple never attempted to pay for their intellectual property, despite using it for what they describe as “a potentially lucrative venture.”