Anti-diversity activist sues Google for $15M over AI hallucinations

Robby Starbuck, an anti-diversity activist known for his corporate campaigns, has filed a $15 million defamation lawsuit against Google, claiming the company’s AI search tools falsely linked him to sexual assault allegations and white nationalist Richard Spencer. This marks Starbuck’s second legal challenge against a major tech company over AI-generated content, following a successful settlement with Meta that resulted in him being hired as an advisor to combat “ideological and political bias” in its chatbot.

What you should know: The lawsuit targets Google’s AI search capabilities for allegedly generating false and defamatory information about Starbuck.

• Starbuck claims Google’s AI tools incorrectly associated him with sexual assault allegations and connected him to white nationalist Richard Spencer.
• He filed the suit in Delaware Superior Court seeking $15 million in damages, according to the Wall Street Journal.
• This follows a similar pattern to his April lawsuit against Meta, which was settled when the company hired him as an advisor.

Google’s response: The company acknowledged the complaint while pointing to known limitations of AI technology.

• Google spokesperson José Castañeda told The Verge that “most of these claims relate to hallucinations in Bard that we addressed in 2023.”
• “Hallucinations are a well known issue for all LLMs, which we disclose and work hard to minimize. But as everyone knows, if you’re creative enough, you can prompt a chatbot to say something misleading,” Castañeda said.

In plain English: AI “hallucinations” occur when chatbots confidently generate false information that sounds plausible but isn’t based on real data—like a confident student giving a wrong answer on a test.

Legal precedent challenges: No U.S. court has yet awarded damages in a defamation case involving AI chatbots, creating uncertainty around these emerging legal battles.

• Conservative radio host Mark Walters sued OpenAI in 2023, claiming ChatGPT defamed him by linking him to fraud and embezzlement accusations.
• The court ruled in favor of OpenAI, finding that Walters failed to prove “actual malice.”
• AI chatbots represent very new technologies with limited legal precedent surrounding them.

The bigger picture: Starbuck’s legal strategy appears designed to secure influence within tech companies rather than simply win monetary damages.

• His Meta settlement was part of a series of hires that seemed aimed at addressing conservative criticism of the platform.
• The exact terms of the Meta settlement remain unknown, but it resulted in Starbuck gaining an advisory position.
• Industry observers suggest Starbuck would likely be “just as happy with a position of influence” at Google as he secured at Meta.