Can I sue for harm caused by AI-generated content or deepfakes?

Yes. You may have a legal claim if AI-generated content causes reputational harm, defamation, impersonation, or misuses your image or voice. These cases can fall under defamation law, the right of publicity, and digital privacy statutes. Victims may also sue for emotional distress or pursue claims under Massachusetts Chapter 93A if the content was deceptive or widely distributed. Cross-border claims may arise under privacy laws like the GDPR if the content was shared internationally.

Is it illegal for AI to discriminate in hiring or lending?

Yes. If an AI system produces biased outcomes in hiring, housing, lending, or healthcare, it may violate civil rights laws like Title VII, the ADA, or FCRA. In Massachusetts, discrimination may also violate Chapter 151B. Victims may bring individual or class action lawsuits. In some cases, this bias may also trigger ESG or antitrust liability if used at scale by dominant companies.

Can I join a class action for an AI-related data breach or data misuse?

Yes. If an AI system collects or leaks your personal or biometric data without consent, you may qualify for a class action lawsuit. Legal claims may be available under the CCPA, GDPR, HIPAA, or Massachusetts privacy and consumer protection laws. Lawsuits may also target companies that use scraped personal data to train AI models without notice or consent.

Can I sue if my startup’s IP was scraped to train an AI model?

Yes. If your code, designs, datasets, or other proprietary content were used without permission to train AI, you may have claims for copyright infringement, trade secret misappropriation, or contract breach. These lawsuits may be brought under the Copyright Act, the Defend Trade Secrets Act, or Massachusetts unfair competition law—especially if the scraped content was covered by an NDA or licensing terms.

Is AI-based workplace surveillance or productivity scoring legal?

It depends. AI systems that monitor employees must comply with privacy, labor, and anti-discrimination laws. In Massachusetts, tools that track keystrokes, facial expressions, or voice data may trigger claims under the ECPA, Chapter 151B, or wrongful termination laws. Employers that use AI without transparency or bias mitigation may face lawsuits.

What legal protections do whistleblowers have when reporting illegal AI use?

Whistleblowers who report unsafe or illegal use of AI—like biased algorithms, data misuse, or ESG fraud—may be protected under the False Claims Act, Dodd-Frank Act, or Massachusetts whistleblower laws. If they suffer retaliation, they may be entitled to reinstatement, back pay, and damages. Whistleblowers may also file qui tam lawsuits involving AI misuse in government contracting or securities fraud.

Can I sue for securities fraud related to AI claims?

Yes. If a company lies or omits material facts about its AI systems—such as exaggerating capabilities, concealing safety risks, or misleading investors—it may face liability under Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act. Investors harmed by false AI disclosures can bring securities fraud lawsuits or class actions.

Can I sue over flawed AI models used in ESG or climate risk disclosures?

Yes. If a company uses AI to generate climate or ESG disclosures that are false, misleading, or incomplete, investors and stakeholders may pursue claims. Legal remedies may be available under federal securities laws, Massachusetts Chapter 93A, or for negligent misrepresentation. This applies to disclosures in SEC filings, sustainability reports, or investor materials that rely on unreliable AI models.

AI Law Attorneys in Boston – Tech Innovation & Compliance Counsel

AI Law

We represent clients harmed by advanced AI—pursuing accountability for financial loss, algorithmic abuse, discrimination, environmental damage, and regulatory failure.

37

AlphaGo’s 2016 Move 37 showcased AI’s potential, like atom splitting.

1

Assuming AI is in its Day 1 amoeba phase, we must be prepared for when it becomes a Day 2 behemoth.

1-7

In 1-7 years, AI may act independently, beyond human control, raising critical issues of aligning algorithms with human values.

60%

By 2030, AI may automate or significantly alter up to 60% of existing U.S. jobs, with white-collar roles in law, finance, media, and administration among the most at risk. 4

Algorithms used in financial services that mislead or manipulate users into fraudulent transactions could result in claims for financial loss.

Algorithms in finance, healthcare, defense, environmental modeling, and public services increasingly act without transparency—causing harm that demands accountability. From false arrests to manipulated financial products to flawed climate projections, AI’s reach now exceeds regulatory readiness.

For perspective on what’s unfolding, AlphaGo’s 2016 victory with Move 37 showcased Al’s unprecedented capabilities. After 2,500 years of human dominance in Go—a strategy board game originating in China around 500 BCE, and much more complex than chess—a silicon-based system quickly outperformed organic intelligence in a game that had challenged human ability for millennia.

Assuming Al is now in its ‘Day 1’ amoeba phase, we must consider what will happen as it rapidly evolves into a technological juggernaut, possibly within the next 1-7 years. One that has agency-inorganically capable of independent decision-making and reshaping human life, from governance to economics, in domains once solely controlled by humans. Technological singularity may be closer than we think.

Overview

We represent plaintiffs in complex disputes involving rapidly advancing AI—challenging unlawful use, institutional overreach, and novel harms stemming from automated decision-making, surveillance, and algorithmic control.

Corporations may be held responsible for the actions of their algorithms.

Autonomous AI Risks

As AI rapidly advances, its legal, ethical, and societal implications grow exponentially. Our AI law practice guides clients through the evolving risks posed by these transformative technologies, advocating for ethical and responsible use within legal boundaries. Central to our approach is addressing the ‘alignment problem’—the risk that AI could act counter to human values, as illustrated by Nick Bostrom’s ‘paperclip’ scenario, a challenge made more complex by the fact that human values themselves are not aligned.

AI pioneer and Nobel Prize winner in physics Geoffrey Hinton has also warned of the existential threat AI may pose if it gains control, raising concerns about humanity’s future in the face of autonomous superintelligence that vastly surpasses the collective intelligence of humankind.

Clients may seek compensation for harm caused by AI-driven vehicles, drones, or machinery that malfunctions, leading to personal injury or property damage.

Your Rights

Class Actions: Group litigation can address widespread Al-driven harms, enabling victims to seek compensation for privacy violations, identity theft, financial loss, environmental damage, or other injuries resulting from poor security practices, faulty algorithms, or unlawful Al deployment.
Data Privacy: Victims of unauthorized data collection, surveillance, or model training using personal information may bring claims under the CCPA, GDPR, HIPAA, and Massachusetts privacy laws, including Chapter 93A.
Intellectual Property Violations: If Al systems use or generate content that infringes on copyrights, trade secrets, or proprietary datasets, affected parties may bring IP claims or pursue injunctive relief.
Product Liability: Al-driven devices-including autonomous vehicles, drones, and robotics-may cause injury or damage when operating beyond their intended limits. Victims may pursue claims under traditional and emerging product liability doctrines.
Surveillance and Civil Liberties: When Al tools in policing, education, or employment violate privacy or civil rights - through facial recognition, biometric profiling, or predictive scoring — those harmed may have claims under federal and Massachusetts civil rights statutes.

Legal claims may involve misuse of AI in surveillance, defense, or law enforcement that results in unlawful harm, privacy violations, or wrongful death.

Lawyers' Role

Our firm helps clients confront the complex legal, institutional, and systemic risks posed by advanced AI systems:

Strategic Litigation Against Institutional Overreach: Challenge AI deployments by corporations and governments that inflict widespread harm, operate beyond legal limits, or undermine accountability through automation.
AI Governance Failures and Structural Harm: Address harms that arise when AI operates without guardrails, including situations where autonomous tools bypass regulatory constraints, displace human judgment, or produce unreviewable outcomes.
Accountability for Widespread Algorithmic Harm: Pursue claims against entities that deploy AI systems to make high-impact decisions—such as pricing, eligibility, or risk assessment—without adequate oversight, transparency, or legal safeguards, particularly where such deployment violates antitrust laws, consumer protection statutes, or public trust obligations.

Public Impact Litigation Involving AI Misuse: Represent whistleblowers, advocacy groups, and impacted individuals in cases aimed at correcting systemic misuse of AI in defense, law enforcement, education, and climate disclosures.
Long-Term Counsel on Emerging AI Risk: Help plaintiffs identify, preserve, and prepare legal claims involving emerging AI-related harms—particularly where automated systems influence decision-making, replace regulatory oversight, or create complex cross-border liability.
Litigation Framing for Unsettled AI Doctrines: Represent clients in complex cases where traditional legal theories—such as negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, or failure to warn—must be adapted to AI-driven conduct, requiring both factual development and innovative legal framing.

How We Can Help

AI-Related Financial and Securities Fraud

Represent investors and consumers harmed by misleading AI product claims, false ESG disclosures, algorithmic trading manipulation, or AI-related crypto fraud. Claims may arise under the Securities Exchange Act, FTC guidelines, and Chapter 93A.

Privacy and Biometric Data Violations

Pursue legal action for unauthorized scraping, model training, or surveillance using personal data—such as facial recognition, voiceprints, or behavioral tracking—under CCPA, GDPR, HIPAA, and Massachusetts privacy laws.

Algorithmic Discrimination in Employment, Lending, and Housing

Advocate for individuals subjected to discriminatory outcomes from AI systems used in hiring, credit scoring, insurance, or tenant screening. Litigate under Title VII, the ADA, FCRA, and Massachusetts Chapter 151B.

Whistleblower Claims Involving AI Misconduct

Protect individuals who report unlawful AI deployment in finance, government contracting, or healthcare—pursuing relief under the False Claims Act, Dodd-Frank Act, and Massachusetts whistleblower laws.

Environmental Accountability for AI-Driven Misrepresentation

Pursue claims against companies whose AI systems produce false climate risk models, greenwashing disclosures, or ESG ratings—triggering liability under SEC regulations, Chapter 93A, and public trust doctrines.

AI Workplace Surveillance and Productivity Scoring

Represent employees harmed by AI-based monitoring systems that violate privacy, labor laws, or anti-discrimination protections—such as algorithmic termination, bias in performance scoring, or failure to obtain informed consent.

Class Actions for Systemic AI Misuse

Bring collective actions on behalf of those impacted by data breaches, algorithmic bias, or widespread AI failures.

Healthcare Algorithm Failures

Litigate against AI-driven diagnostic or treatment tools that cause harm through bias, error, or denial of care.

Autonomous Vehicle and Drone Malfunctions

Pursue product liability claims involving injury or property damage caused by unsupervised or defective AI systems.

AI-Generated Defamation and Deepfakes

Hold companies accountable for reputational damage caused by synthetic media, impersonation, or malicious content.

AI in Surveillance and Predictive Policing

Challenge civil rights violations stemming from facial recognition errors, over-policing, or algorithmic targeting.

IP Misuse by Generative AI

Represent creators and businesses whose proprietary data, software, or copyrighted works were used without consent in AI model training.

Cross-Border and Jurisdictional AI Liability

Help clients navigate cross-border AI harms by coordinating with international counsel, assessing U.S. legal exposure, and pursuing claims arising from overlapping regulatory regimes—including GDPR, CCPA, and federal privacy or securities laws.

Public Benefit Algorithmic Denials

Represent those wrongfully excluded from healthcare, housing, or food assistance due to flawed AI eligibility tools.