Tony Robbins sues for unauthorized AI chatbots
On YESCAT, users can unleash their “inner cynic” with the help of a Larry David Bot. Or “Explore Jewish wisdom” with another Larry David Bot. Or workshop horror stories with a Stephen King Bot. Or talk about criticism with Roger Ebert.
It is unlikely that one of the celebrities whose names appear on these bots have something to do with it.
Last month, Tony Robbins, the motivating speaker, Dress the makers of YESCATThey accuse the hijacking of his name and reputation for a series of bots on the site. Among them: talk to Tony Robbins, Tony Robbins GPT and Tony Robbins Español GPT.
Robbins claims that the unauthorized bots have taken his seminars and other copyrighted content and selling it under his name, which he has trademark. YESCAT has various paid subscription layers, ranging from $ 8/month to $ 40/month, giving users access to 200,000 GPTs.
The lawsuit claims that the bots are competing with its own authorized AI clone of Robbins, which is available on its website for $ 99/month.
Brian Wolf, the lawyer who has submitted the case, said that this is the first case he is aware.
“I don’t know that there has been another situation in which a public figure or celebrity has filed a claim against a GPT -Chatbot -where they created a chatbot to mimic the persona of a famous individual,” he said.
YESCAT did not respond to the cease -the Wolf’s letter. The companies behind it – Innoleap and Mira Muse – also have to respond to the court case, which was filed at the federal court in San Diego on 26 June.
The lawsuit claims that federal trademark and false advertising claims, as well as a violation of the right to Publicity Act of California. The suit is looking for at least $ 10 million in compensatory damage for unfair competition, plus $ 2 million for every trademark violation, plus punitive compensation for “intentional and malignant misconduct”.
Other makers have filed countless lawsuits on the unauthorized use of copyright protected material to train AI models. AI companies have had some success claiming that such a training is ‘reasonable use’, but Wolf says that this case is different.
“Those cases are different from this case, where they simulate and recreate a virtual person of a well -known person and advertise it as such,” said Wolf, Van Laverely & Singer. “We represent countless celebrities and public figures, and we follow a pretty aggressive approach on behalf of those customers.”
