AI and Technology Dispute Attorneys
Disputes over software, data, models, and technology contracts: breach of contract, trade secret misappropriation under federal and Florida law, computer intrusion, copyright, and false advertising claims about what a product does.
Technology disputes arise when a system does not do what the contract promised, when a departing engineer takes code or model weights, when a competitor scrapes or accesses systems without authorization, when training data or outputs are alleged to infringe, or when marketing claims about a product’s capabilities mislead customers. The claims are drawn from contract law, the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and the Florida Uniform Trade Secrets Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Copyright Act, and the Lanham Act’s false advertising provision.
Industria Business Lawyers represents technology companies, their customers, and their founders in these disputes in federal and Florida courts and in arbitration. Every provision cited on this page was read from the United States Code or the 2026 Florida Statutes. A consultation is free.
The Claims Technology Disputes Are Built On
The statutes, quoted from the text in force, and the contract claim that usually sits beside them.
Federal Trade Secret Misappropriation
The Defend Trade Secrets Act, 18 U.S.C. 1836(b)(1), provides that an owner of a trade secret that is misappropriated may bring a civil action if the trade secret is related to a product or service used in, or intended for use in, interstate or foreign commerce. 18 U.S.C. 1836(d) provides that the action may not be commenced later than three years after the misappropriation is discovered or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have been discovered. Source code, model weights, training pipelines, and customer data are frequent subjects of these claims.
Florida Trade Secret Misappropriation
Section 688.002(4), Florida Statutes, defines a trade secret as information, including a program, method, technique, or process, that derives independent economic value from not being generally known or readily ascertainable and is the subject of reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. Section 688.004 provides for actual loss and unjust enrichment, or a reasonable royalty, and exemplary damages up to twice the award for willful and malicious misappropriation. Section 688.007 sets three years from discovery.
Unauthorized Computer Access
The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. 1030(g), provides that any person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of the section may maintain a civil action against the violator for compensatory damages and injunctive or other equitable relief, where the conduct involves one of the factors in subclauses (I) through (V) of subsection (c)(4)(A)(i), such as a loss of at least $5,000 in a one-year period, and must be brought within two years of the act complained of or the date of discovery of the damage.
Copyright Infringement
17 U.S.C. 501(a) provides that anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 is an infringer of the copyright. Disputes over copying of code, and over the use of copyrighted works to build or operate a model, are brought under this provision; for a United States work, 17 U.S.C. 411(a) generally requires registration before suit, and section 412 generally bars statutory damages and attorney’s fees under sections 504 and 505 for infringement that began before registration.
False Advertising About a Product
Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(B), imposes civil liability on any person who, in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, or qualities of his or her or another person’s goods, services, or commercial activities, in favor of any person who believes that he or she is or is likely to be damaged. Competitor claims about what an AI or software product can do are brought under this provision.
Contract Claims
Most technology disputes turn first on the agreement: the license, the master services agreement, the statement of work, the service levels, the warranty, and the limitation of liability. Section 95.11(2)(b), Florida Statutes, sets five years for an action on a contract founded on a written instrument. The firm reads the contract’s dispute resolution, governing law, and liability cap clauses before any claim is framed.
How a Technology Dispute Is Framed
The contract, the code, and the logs decide most of these cases.
Start with the agreement. The license or services agreement sets what was promised, the remedies available, any cap on damages, and whether the dispute goes to arbitration. A claim framed without reading those terms can be limited or displaced by them.
Secrecy is an element. Both 18 U.S.C. 1839(3) and section 688.002(4) require that the information was the subject of reasonable secrecy measures. Access controls, confidentiality agreements, repository permissions, and exit procedures are gathered at the outset because they determine whether the information qualifies.
Preserve the technical evidence. Repository histories, access logs, cloud audit trails, and device images show who accessed what and when. Preservation demands and, where the facts warrant it, forensic imaging are the first steps in a misappropriation or intrusion case.
Choose the claims with the remedy in view. The Defend Trade Secrets Act gives a federal forum; section 688.004 provides exemplary damages for willful and malicious misappropriation; 18 U.S.C. 1030(g) reaches access without authorization; and 15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(B) reaches misleading product claims. The claims chosen are the ones the facts support.
Deadlines. Two years under 18 U.S.C. 1030(g), three years from discovery under 18 U.S.C. 1836(d) and section 688.007, and five years for a written contract under section 95.11(2)(b). The review starts with the dates of discovery.
Read more...
They consistently deliver thorough and timely work. We wholeheartedly recommend IBL.”
Client testimonials describe individual experiences. You may not obtain the same or similar results.
Read more...
I would recommend working with Aaron and team.”
Client testimonials describe individual experiences. You may not obtain the same or similar results.
Read more...
As a result, we’ve continued to rely on them as our go-to legal counsel for ongoing corporate matters.”
Client testimonials describe individual experiences. You may not obtain the same or similar results.
Read more...
The attorneys were incredibly responsive, guiding me through every step of the process with clarity and professionalism.
They took the time to address all my questions and concerns, ensuring that I felt confident in each decision we made. Their attention to detail and thoroughness were evident in the documents they prepared, which gave me peace of mind. What stood out most was their commitment to my vision. They not only provided legal advice but also offered valuable insights into the industry, helping me navigate potential challenges and seize opportunities.
Overall, working with IBL was a fantastic experience. They made a complex process manageable and stress-free. Thank you for your outstanding support.”
Client testimonials describe individual experiences. You may not obtain the same or similar results.
How We Handle a Technology Dispute
The license, services agreement, and statements of work read for promises, remedies, caps, and forum.
Preservation demands, repository and log collection, and forensic imaging where warranted.
What was accessed, copied, or delivered, established from the code and the logs with technical consultants.
Contract, DTSA, Florida trade secret, CFAA, copyright, or Lanham Act claims chosen on the facts.
Whether emergency relief is warranted to stop ongoing use or disclosure.
Federal court, Florida court, or arbitration under the agreement, within the applicable periods.
Negotiated license, return and certification of materials, settlement, or judgment.
FAQ
01 • Technology Companies Is our source code a trade secret?
It can be. Under section 688.002(4) and the federal definition, information qualifies if it derives independent economic value from not being generally known and is the subject of reasonable efforts to keep it secret. The secrecy measures taken are part of the proof.
02 • Technology Companies How long do we have to sue for trade secret theft?
Three years after the misappropriation is discovered or should have been discovered, under both 18 U.S.C. 1836(d) and section 688.007, Florida Statutes.
03 • Technology Companies Can we sue a competitor for accessing our systems?
18 U.S.C. 1030(g) provides a civil action for compensatory damages and equitable relief to a person who suffers damage or loss from a violation, where the conduct involves one of the listed factors, brought within two years.
04 • Technology Companies Can we sue a competitor over false claims about their AI product?
15 U.S.C. 1125(a)(1)(B) imposes liability for commercial advertising that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, or qualities of goods or services, in favor of a person likely to be damaged by it.
05 • Technology Companies Does our contract limit what we can recover?
Often. Limitation of liability, exclusive remedy, and arbitration clauses shape many technology disputes, and they are reviewed before any claim is filed.
Technology companies, customers, and founders. Call (202) 860-1210 or describe the dispute through the form. Free consultation. Every matter is evaluated against the statute text in force.
This page provides general information about AI and technology disputes under federal and Florida law and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Industria Business Lawyers. Whether a claim, defense, or obligation exists depends on the facts and the law in force. Provisions cited were read on October 2, 2026 from the United States Code and the 2026 Florida Statutes at flsenate.gov.