Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AI

Disney Puts $1 Billion Into OpenAI, Licenses 200+ Characters for AI-Generated Videos and Images (openai.com) 42

Disney is investing $1 billion in OpenAI and has entered into a three-year licensing deal that will let users generate AI-powered short videos and images featuring more than 200 characters from its Disney, Marvel, Star Wars and Pixar franchises.

The new features are expected to launch in 2026 through Sora, OpenAI's short-form video platform, and ChatGPT. A selection of user-generated short videos will also be available to stream on Disney+. The licensing agreement excludes any talent likenesses or voices. Disney will receive warrants to purchase additional OpenAI equity as part of the arrangement, and its employees will gain access to OpenAI tools including ChatGPT for building new products.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Disney Puts $1 Billion Into OpenAI, Licenses 200+ Characters for AI-Generated Videos and Images

Comments Filter:
  • by Gilmoure ( 18428 ) on Thursday December 11, 2025 @11:30AM (#65850913) Journal

    are specifically excluded.

  • by almitydave ( 2452422 ) on Thursday December 11, 2025 @11:49AM (#65850941)

    You know, the one thing I always thought was missing from my overpriced Disney+ subscription was user-generated "AI" slop.

    • by mysidia ( 191772 )

      from my overpriced Disney+ subscription was user-generated "AI" slop.

      The article says a selection. Presumably terms will let them cherrypick videos they like, so it will probably be not slop, but whatever generations they deem high quality. Likely involving extra work by the end user, since actor voices aren't included for the characters.

    • If I'm reading this correctly, this is to allow other services, eg YouTube "creators", to create their own AI slop based on Disney characters. So you can create a movie where Luke Skywalker battles Thanos with the help of Woody and Elsa using OpenAI's movie creation system. It'll be terrible, but you're now allowed to do it without suffering the wrath of the mouse. Just be warned you'll suffer the wrath of everyone else. Just Disney won't sue. Probably.

  • Only to cave to AI mass copyright infringement. Well played Disney.
  • by nucrash ( 549705 ) on Thursday December 11, 2025 @12:23PM (#65851047)

    Disney blows $1 billion on AI is probably more accurate

    • by mysidia ( 191772 )

      More importantly: They set a business precedent for media companies that it is appropriate to demand licensing and expect generative AI companies have to pay for creating images resembling any of their characters/trained on their characters - even in a short video or internet meme context.

      What they have licensed for now they can de-license in a few years, when Disney releases their own generative AI service.

  • Do I have this right?

    They put in $1B, then they will likely get more than $1B ROI just on license fees.

    Then they have the stock and the revenue stream. Where can I get a deal like that?

    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      More and more it seems like OpenAI's business model is turning into pure accounting gimmicks.

      Options on datacenters that will never be built, investments from vendors who make the hardware (vastly more technically complex) OpenAI needs to do what they do, so OpenAI can turn around and spend it with them, and now money from mouse they will return in license fees..

      Can't wait to read the reports when OpenAI goes tits up, its going to be Enron level exciting.

    • By buying into a company, like anyone else... I can't believe you seriously asked that question.
      I have revenue streams from several private and public corporations that I own stock in.
  • We have a company with traditional roots in human created animations. AI threatened their livelihood by making similar animations dirt cheap. Did they fight AI for it being trained on their old movies? No they sold out because they have IP and can get a cut of the AI gravy train.
    Now if AI threatens your livelihood what can you do? Better think about that now because if you wait till it happens you may have to wait a long time to change how you vote.
    First AI came for the artists And I did not speak out Be
    • Hard disagree. AI is the future. We should be more concerned with altering our government to serve the people then trying to put the AI back in the box. Even if USA bans AI, China won't and they'll take over just fine. They'll probably take care of their citizens better as well.

      Our best bet is to embrace AI and work towards freeing up human labor for things it can't do.

      All you AI people sound like buggy whip people whining about the car being made.

      • It is interesting to draw a line from the Luddites of the industrial revolution to the present shift with AI. Then it was machines that replaced manual labour. Now we have systems that can imitate human reasoning and threaten to absorb much of the work done by white collar roles. Generalised robotics is also close to taking over many blue collar tasks. The real question is whether society will adapt fast enough. Human capital is still valuable, but the form it takes is changing. The pace of that change is u
        • We don't have a technology problem. We have a social norms problem. As you mention, we'll need to adapt.

          That's why I mentioned China. Without having visited there or talking with their people, it sounds like their government does more for their citizens then USA does for it's citizens. If China continues to develop AI and it starts to free up human labor, they have a higher chance of actually caring for their citizens.

          We've seen first hand that the rich in USA do not care about the poor. I don't even care w

        • Will we become a new kind of Luddite movement in response

          Do you read this site? The AI luddites are fucking vicious. You can see their desperation grow as AI progressively fills the gaps in their Intelligence of the Gaps argument. They're not far from firebombing offices.

      • Hard disagree: LLM, sold as you're selling it, is a con. It is not a viable replacement for human beings over the long term. LLMs train on information that's created by human beings. There's zero incentive to create that content if LLMs will just gobble it up and sit between the end users and authors.

        Be very clear on this: as we shift to LLMs being put in front of everything, the incentive to post answers to StackOverflow or Reddit, the incentive to post news, the incentive to post movie reviews, the incent

    • by mysidia ( 191772 )

      First AI came for the artists And I did not speak out Because I was not an artist

      AI has not come for the artists. Artists are still necessary to create quality work.

      There is simply a technical improvement, and you may have to learn new AI-based tools now required for the trade of creating animations.

  • They have arguably the most valuable copyright content on planet Earth and are paying 1 billion to give it away. Make it make sense.
    • by DarkOx ( 621550 )

      Collect a rent from OpenAI everytime some little girl asks mommy to print some Disney Princes invitations to her imaginary tea party.

    • by mysidia ( 191772 )

      Earth and are paying 1 billion to give it away. Make it make sense.

      In short.. they are Not giving it away; they are expanding monetization into an area they'd not get money from before. They are earning billions in license fees for allowing limited use for limited time.

    • I'm not sure a concept, even as simple as this, could be explained to you.

      I'll try anyway.
      They've made an investment. As part of that investment, the corporation will agree to a licensing deal with ~$1B/yr for Disney. Money they would otherwise not have gotten.
      Their investment will make money, and the licensing will make money.
      OpenAI benefits by pushing out the time at which they need to become profitable.

      Nothing about this is even strange. It's normal startup behavior.

      What they have not done is gi
      • by allo ( 1728082 )

        Add to that:
        - ChatGPT/Sora gets an advantage over other video generators
        - ChatGPT gets more (paying) users and makes more profit (to the benefit of all investors)
        - OpenAI has less legal problems
        - OpenAI's investors have less concern about OpenAI's legal problems
        - Disney's content is present on another platform and having users interact with it, which is basically a free ad
        - There are probably a lot of ideas how to monetize such creations, from ads for related Disney movies to selling prints or even plushies

  • Can't unwatch "Hi, I'm Butters. And this is Totoro...", unfortunately.

    Alman on CNBC: "Disney will develop their own boundaries...."

    Pretty damn quickly, I'd wager.

  • And...what happens at the end of the three year deal? Does all that generated content go away, or suddenly become owned by Disney? Can you still generate content on the content that was generated with licensed content? Make it make sense.

    On the other hand, people are doing this anyway (unlicensed), so might as well cash in while you can.
    • A selection of user-generated short videos will also be available to stream on Disney+.

      Users are going to be producing the content for Disney, so of course D+ is going to keep it. This is essentially a new form of rent-seeking [wikipedia.org].

  • by smooth wombat ( 796938 ) on Thursday December 11, 2025 @01:44PM (#65851353) Journal

    Better versions of Rule 34 will now be in play.

  • Not surprising. Disney has been a creatively bankrupt company for years especially with Bob Iger at the helm. And Disney+ has been hemorrhaging money and users for months due to some very stupid management decisions.

    OpenAI, another company also bleeding money, provides them an infinite content machine in the hopes both companies can bail each other out of their financial woes.

    Meanwhile both companies will continue to hike the price of their services and implement increasingly more anti-consumer practices su

  • Wait, shouldn't it be the other way around? Surely OpenAI should be paying Disney a billion to use it's IP? I'm confused.

Dealing with the problem of pure staff accumulation, all our researches ... point to an average increase of 5.75% per year. -- C.N. Parkinson

Working...