DataClaim.co.uk claim compensation against Google and Microsoft for AI.

JamesM_2

This was just advertised on the radio.

Www.dataclaim.co.uk

Run by Barings Solicitors. They claim to be attempting a group litigation against both Google and Microsoft for the misuse of personal data to train AI systems.

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

My big questions though are...

A. Are you likely to lose out if they succeed and you haven't signed up to their scheme?

B. Will they be offering a fair deal and  not keeping 99% for themselves? Will there be better offers available?

I'm sure there's lots of other questions to ask so I thought I'd ask here for opinions.

Jenni_D

The ambulance chasers are trying everything to keep the gravy train going after all the PPI mis-selling malarky they profited from. The last one was Diesel-Gate.

singhini

Have a read of this if you like
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6577196/google-and-microsoft-ai-claim?utm_source=community-search&utm_medium=organic-search&utm_term=GOOGLE+and+microsoft+AI

eskbanker

JamesM_2 said:

This was just advertised on the radio.

Www.dataclaim.co.uk

Run by Barings Solicitors. They claim to be attempting a group litigation against both Google and Microsoft for the misuse of personal data to train AI systems.

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Really?

I have some magic beans if you'd be interested in buying them?

Ergates

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Why?

A. Are you likely to lose out if they succeed and you haven't signed up to their scheme?

Not in any meaningful sense of the words.  Was this an issue you were even aware of before hearing the adverts?  Are you aware of any detriment you have suffered due to the misuse of your personal data for training AI?

B. Will they be offering a fair deal and  not keeping 99% for themselves? Will there be better offers available?

No. They're not out to get a fair deal for you, they're in it for maximum profit for themselves.  They wouldn't be acting on your behalf, they'd be acting on their own behalf, using you as an excuse.  Any other company that advertises a similar service will be the same.    

In the oft repeated words of the late Lynne Foulds Wood - "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".   Free money doesn't just drop out of the sky.

JamesM_2

Ergates said:

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Why?

A. Are you likely to lose out if they succeed and you haven't signed up to their scheme?

Not in any meaningful sense of the words.  Was this an issue you were even aware of before hearing the adverts?  Are you aware of any detriment you have suffered due to the misuse of your personal data for training AI?

B. Will they be offering a fair deal and  not keeping 99% for themselves? Will there be better offers available?

No. They're not out to get a fair deal for you, they're in it for maximum profit for themselves.  They wouldn't be acting on your behalf, they'd be acting on their own behalf, using you as an excuse.  Any other company that advertises a similar service will be the same.    

In the oft repeated words of the late Lynne Foulds Wood - "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".   Free money doesn't just drop out of the sky.

 said:

JamesM_2 said:

This was just advertised on the radio.

Www.dataclaim.co.uk

Run by Barings Solicitors. They claim to be attempting a group litigation against both Google and Microsoft for the misuse of personal data to train AI systems.

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Really?

I have some magic beans if you'd be interested in buying them?

Why? Because if they win their lawsuit you will likely get money. The issue is less about receiving the money than how much.

Of course they're doing it for their own gain. My interest is what alternatives there may be and what percentage they are willing to pay out.

We have all had our data used without our consent to train AI. I'm not after a huge unreasonable payout but I don't see some compensation as unreasonable.

I'm a very sceptical person but to dismiss everything as 'too good to be true' when it has legal merit is foolish.

I'm not against AI, I think it's fantastic in many ways in fact. I'm also aware that I've probably provided millions or more lines of text and intellectual property to help create it.

born_again

JamesM_2 said:

Ergates said:

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Why?

A. Are you likely to lose out if they succeed and you haven't signed up to their scheme?

Not in any meaningful sense of the words.  Was this an issue you were even aware of before hearing the adverts?  Are you aware of any detriment you have suffered due to the misuse of your personal data for training AI?

B. Will they be offering a fair deal and  not keeping 99% for themselves? Will there be better offers available?

No. They're not out to get a fair deal for you, they're in it for maximum profit for themselves.  They wouldn't be acting on your behalf, they'd be acting on their own behalf, using you as an excuse.  Any other company that advertises a similar service will be the same.    

In the oft repeated words of the late Lynne Foulds Wood - "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is".   Free money doesn't just drop out of the sky.

 said:

JamesM_2 said:

This was just advertised on the radio.

Www.dataclaim.co.uk

Run by Barings Solicitors. They claim to be attempting a group litigation against both Google and Microsoft for the misuse of personal data to train AI systems.

My first instinct is that this is probably legit.

Really?

I have some magic beans if you'd be interested in buying them?

Why? Because if they win their lawsuit you will likely get money. The issue is less about receiving the money than how much.

Of course they're doing it for their own gain. My interest is what alternatives there may be and what percentage they are willing to pay out.

We have all had our data used without our consent to train AI. I'm not after a huge unreasonable payout but I don't see some compensation as unreasonable.

I'm a very sceptical person but to dismiss everything as 'too good to be true' when it has legal merit is foolish.

I'm not against AI, I think it's fantastic in many ways in fact. I'm also aware that I've probably provided millions or more lines of text and intellectual property to help create it.

If the lose who is funding the case? Certainly not them.  As these cases do not come cheap...

So they will sell you insurance, or you run the risk of a big bill, when they go bust & the winning side come chasing you for the costs 🤷‍♀️

GDB2222

These class action lawsuits are very common in the USA, but the law is different there. 

Here, you may have a conditional fee agreement with your own lawyers, but you are at risk for the other side's fees in defending the case, and those fees will be eye watering. 

Your lawyer will offer you after the event insurance, and tell you that they will meet the premium and deduct it fr9m any claim you receive. However, when your lawyer goes bust, as many of these high volume solicitors do, you will find yourself being chased for the premium after all. 

One major difference between the UK and the US is the quantum of damages. Here, damages are decided by judges, and for this sort of thing you won’t get much. Punitive damages are rare in the UK, whereas in the US juries dole out gigantic punitive damages for the slightest inconvenience. 

This is not like the diesel emissions scandal, where an individual car owner could argue that they lost several thousand pounds. Your damage from AI training seems pretty intangible and hard to value. It might be different if you were someone whose copyright material was scooped up and used to train AI, so it can regurgitate what you wrote without paying for it.

In short, your upside potential is small, and there’s scope to come a cropper. So, it’s not free money being doled out. 

GDB2222

Have a look at this thread for some idea of what can go wrong.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6579773/plevin-insurance

vacheron

GDB2222 said:

Your lawyer will offer you after the event insurance, and tell you that they will meet the premium and deduct it from any claim you receive. However, when your lawyer goes bust, as many of these high volume solicitors do, you will find yourself being chased for the premium after all. 

This is not like the diesel emissions scandal, where an individual car owner could argue that they lost several thousand pounds. Your damage from AI training seems pretty intangible and hard to value. It might be different if you were someone whose copyright material was scooped up and used to train AI, so it can regurgitate what you wrote without paying for it.

I was part of the diesel emissions scandal collective action, and when successful recieved about £1700 IIRC, after everyone else took their slice. I'm sure the firm representing us took a hefty chunk, but as I had no intention on taking on VW by myself and paying for my own lawyers, "a bird in the hand" seemed particularly appropriate.

This amount was based on the loss from owning the car from new with no finance, and continuing to own it for 10 years until the claim was settled. I therefore doubt that anyone would be getting rich from a claim based on their data "potentially being used to possibly train a computer program".

In our case, the after the event insurance premiums were paid up front by a private entitity in excehange for a percentage of any subsequent win, so we weren't on the line for any unexpected demands from insurance firms for any unpaid premiums.