INSIGHT: Facebook, Princeton in Hot Water With AI Data Trademark Lawsuit

Artificial intelligence has become today’s newest technology. Yet with great technology comes great risk—especially when it encroaches upon intellectual property.

On June 5, a small Lithuanian company, Planner 5D, showed the world it’s not afraid to take on corporate giants like Facebook and Princeton, suing both companies for copyright infringement and trademark misappropriation under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and California’s Uniform Trade Secrets Act.

The case at bar brings in three digitally-relevant concepts—intellectual property, artificial intelligence, and “computer vision.” “Computer vision” is the ability of machines to recognize three-dimensional scenes. A leading research field, reports estimate that the computer vision market will reach $48 billion by 2023, and $60 billion by 2025.

Copyright Law In a Flash

In the United States, copyright law is governed by the federal Copyright Act of 1976 (Act), which prevents the “unauthorized copying of a work of authorship.” To receive copyright protection, a work must be “original” and must be “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression. While registration is not required, it is legally advantageous for holders to register their work with the Copyright Office in the Library of Congress.

Due to the difficulty of proving an actual instance of infringement, courts usually look to circumstantial evidence showing the defendant had “access” to the original work and that the two works were “substantially similar.”

The Defend Trade Secret Act of 2016 (DTSA), enacted during the Obama administration, provides a federal civil remedy for the misappropriation of trade secrets.

Before the DTSA, only criminal charges for trade secret theft were available in federal court. All other civil actions were brought under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA), adopted by 47 states, excluding New York, North Carolina, and Massachusetts.

The DTSA is available to parties who suffer damage by reason of a “wrongful or excessive seizure.” Damages include lost profits, cost of materials, loss of good will, and punitive damages for bad faith.

Unlike the DTSA, California’s CUTSA applies strictly to state-specific IP matters. Four elements must be met for an action to proceed:

1. trade Secret,
2. economic value,
3. secret, and
4. reasonable efforts to protect.

What the AI Is Going on Here?

In its lawsuit against Facebook and Princeton, collectively the defendants, Planner 5D believes its core business model to be at risk. The plaintiff is a home-design software that allows its users to design homes, buildings, and interiors by arranging 3-D models of various objects through its copyrighted and trademarked property. Think “The Sims,” integrated into the 21^st century. Users can navigate through their designs in virtual and augmented reality simulations.

Planner 5D’s business consists of 3-D models of more than 4,500 objects, as well as more than a million pre-designed scenes for use in its software. Per the complaint, plaintiff’s website cannot be accessed without accepting its terms of use, prohibiting users from “scraping, copying, or downloading” any of their files. Yet, Princeton researchers allegedly made out with five gigabytes worth of data, containing more than 2,500 models and 45,000 scenes.

Back in 2016, a Princeton University scientist first published AI research utilizing the SUNCG dataset. The study itself, coincidentally “unavailable,” allegedly referenced that the 3-D models used to train the AI system were downloaded from plaintiff’s website.

Ultimately, the data made its way into the hands of Facebook, helping it help further its developments with the Oculus technology.

What’s Everyone Saying?

At this stage of the lawsuit, it is still extremely early. Planner 5D, by and through its counsel, Marc Bernstein, have stated their intentions to name more corporate defendants to the case as they continue to learn more information.

However, Alexey Sheremetyev, the CEO and founder of Planner 5D, made his concerns clear.

“A copy of our data has been used by researchers at Princeton, Facebook, and elsewhere,” he said. “We are very troubled by this, because this is a core asset of our company. We spent a lot of time and money creating this asset. We think this data is a key ingredient for A.I. scene-recognition search. We brought this lawsuit to address what we regard as a serious threat to our company.”

Take Aways

1. Copyright Law Needs to Be Adapted Into the 21^st Century.

Evidently enough copyright law needs some serious updating. It’s too easy, directly or indirectly, to use a copyright holder’s work without permission, thanks to this thing called the internet and the digitization of music, movies, and every other form of literary work. Back in March, European lawmakers approved its Copyright Directive, which shifts the burden of copyright holders to report DMCA violations, to the platforms themselves taking on the responsibility.

In Planner 5D’s lawsuit, the Lithuanian home-design startup is showing that even the smaller enterprises can take on corporate giants to protect its intellectual property. Yet, Facebook is far from escaping its fate of answering to authorities in light of its data-related issues over the years.

2. For God’s Sake, Stop Scrolling Through Terms of Service, It’s There for a Reason.

Even I am guilty of this, as many of us are—stop scrolling through the terms of service and privacy policies companies place upon their platforms. They are there for a reason, because somewhere buried within, is a notice similar to Planner 5D’s—don’t steal their stuff.
Yes, it’s long and boring, but it could also save you and your client from stepping foot into a courtroom and paying hefty legal fees because you didn’t conduct your own due diligence.

3. “Open-Source” Means Everyone Involved Agrees to Share.

Lastly, “open-source” software or frameworks usually mean, unless I’m new here, that everyone subject to that project or framework, has agreed to share it with a particular group of individuals, or to the general public.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. or its owners.

Author Information

Andrew Rossow is an internet and technology attorney, an adjunct cybersecurity law professor at the University of Dayton in Ohio, and a media consultant for ABC, FOX, and NBC in Ohio. He provides a unique perspective on new, emerging technologies, social media crimes, privacy implications, and digital currencies.