The Legal Challenges Facing Augmented Reality and Mixed Reality
Augmented Reality (AR) and Mixed Reality (MR) are advancing quickly in the market, with estimates projecting more than 50 percent annual growth. While…
August 30, 2017 at 04:32 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Augmented Reality (AR) and Mixed Reality (MR) are advancing quickly in the market, with estimates projecting more than 50 percent annual growth. While the best-known use for these technologies is gaming, they are penetrating industrial, medical, retail and other applications.
Today, AR and MR companies collect, store, and use various user data to enhance the user experience and sometimes share data with network affiliates and business partners, including data related to a device's movements and the dimensions of the room in which the user is using equipment. In addition, AR technology may give a company the ability to constantly record data in relation to everything a user is doing.
This is posing interesting questions around privacy and security – some of which can put up serious roadblocks to AR and MR company's success. Inside Counsel sat down with Kimberly Culp, an attorney at Venable LLP who is closely involved in the challenges facing producers and companies looking to use augmented reality.
Lately, she has already seen litigation over trespass and nuisance claims. She expects the success of those claims to turn largely on the language in the relevant terms of use and how consent was obtained to those terms. But, those claims reflect a big problem: Who is responsible for the behavior of users interacting with the application and the real world? And, how do you control that behavior?
According to Culp, a district court in Milwaukee recently answered that question by suggesting that the governmental controls should be placed on the users, not the game developer, at least in that case. Then there is the question of public safety – in other words, designing controls in apps and hardware that address user safety issues. Game developers should be thinking ahead to how to implement mechanisms in the game to preempt user misuse. She said, “These preemptive efforts are worth the effort to stave off some legal risk.”
“I think one of the biggest challenges is, or will be, the confluence of big data and cybersecurity,” Culp explained. “These immersive experiences have the potential to be particularly engaging where developers can craft an experience targeted to the specific user's interests. That, of course, means that you necessarily have a lot of information about not just that user, but many users.”
There have been many opportunities for branded-partnerships in the AR space where you may have multiple parties interested in accessing that data. So, questions along the lines of: Who owns that data, who can use the data? What can they do with the data? etc. will arise as the applications evolve. “For lawyers, the task remains the same – take new facts and apply them to established law, and sometimes nudge the development of the law in a certain direction,” she said.
However, there are two key areas in the legal industry that Culp thinks will be interesting to watch with respect to AR, MR, or VR. First, is in the courtroom – how will courts respond to requests to present demonstratives to juries using this technology?
“The power to persuade in undeniable. I expect proponents to face challenges of undue prejudice in part because the technology allows the proponent to present facts in such a powerful way,” she explained.
In addition, there will be some foundational challenges – how do you know that the representation is accurate? And, she thinks will be interesting to watch if AR technology accelerates the growth of remote and virtual law firms. In all industries, the ability to collaborate across geographies is compelling, and it isn't any less compelling in the legal market, but will lawyers and law firms be adopters of AR in their practices? Culp hopes so.
What privacy and security best practices for companies to follow when it comes to AR and MR? It is wise to work with outside counsel to develop robust policies and controls on the use of data, and with cybersecurity professionals to test the security of your systems, per Culp.
She added, “I think it will take some time, but I do expect judges to allow trial lawyers to use AR, MR, and eventually VR, in the courtroom. I will be a useful tool for complicated motions – such as patent summary judgment motions – and, ultimately, trial.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Policy Wonks' Obsession: What Will Tuesday's Election Mean for FTC Firebrand Khan?
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250