In one example of generative AI tools being misused, a lawyer who specializes in video game contracts says a recent agreement fell through after the client received a load of vibe-coded material made by someone who didn't "know what he made."

Haley MacLean, IP lawyer and video game practice head at Voyer Law, shared the anonymized incident on Bluesky.

"Programming contractor delivers my client a milestone," she begins. "It’s broken and full of issues so we request revisions before acceptance. Contractor says he can’t and wants full payment. Turns out it’s all AI and he doesn’t even know what he made. So he’s not getting paid and he wasted my client’s time."

In an interview with GamesRadar+, MacLean previously outlined the legal arguments against gen AI use in game development, calling it a copyright risk, a threat to reputation, and a rights ownership hazard. Here, she examines the tech through the lens that more and more developers – in games and beyond – are using: even looking purely at output and ignoring ethical or creative concerns, there's a clear difference between applying AI and thoughtlessly relying on it.

"Also it was a breach of [confidentiality] because he stuck all the confidential game info into the AI tool to 'make' the milestone so there’s also that, she adds. "Just because you can order at a restaurant doesn’t mean you’re a chef."

MacLean told us that she sees more and more clients baking anti-AI clauses into contracts, and she recommends this sort of protection due to the legal risks the tech poses.

Source link