In our latest Darabase Meets, we delve into the legal questions behind augmented reality (AR) with Brian Wassom. From trademark and copyright to the First Amendment, Brian’s expertise lies where law intersects with emerging technologies. Take a look at our video clips showcasing Apple’s VisionPro technology with Brian in avatar form.
Brian reflects on his career and why he transitioned to AR. “I cut my teeth as a young lawyer representing traditional media outlets, newspapers, television, things of that nature…It just struck me as inevitable on so many levels that [AR] was going to be an important technology”.
Legal challenges
Brian shares insights into the legal challenges posed by AR technology. “As we start laying digital content onto the canvas that is the physical world, those two worlds start to intersect.” The legal considerations are multifaceted, whether thinking about publisher and brand rights, property rights, marketing regulations or public safety.
Brian sheds light on significant legal battles, such as the case involving PokémonGo in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where “they passed a rule that purported to regulate the publishers of the games themselves, not the people playing the games…and they said, you can’t publish a game that takes place in our public parks without our permission.” Brian goes on to explain that “from a legal perspective, I think the most damaging defect was that they actually purported to tell software companies what they could and could not publish and that to me was a very clear First Amendment issue. The right to publish software is the same as speech. Software is expressive content, the government cannot tell you what the content of that software can be ahead of time.“
Is the future positive?
Brian is enthusiastic for the transformative potential of AR and the idea of a shared immersive layer into which anyone can put their digital content. “I am really enchanted by this idea of the augmented reality shared experience.” At the same time, he believes this shared layer could exacerbate the likelihood of consumers misinterpreting messages, and is that likelihood of confusion that underpins many claims of publisher, landowner and commercial rights. Looking ahead, Brian suggests that “By and large, it won’t necessarily be the law changing. It will be changing our understanding and applications of well-established legal principles to this new medium.”
Finally Brian discusses what worries and excites him about AR. He’s looking forward to the moment when AR becomes less flashy, “when it becomes subtle, when we get to AR contact lenses for example…and are interacting with digital content in a way that is useful: little things that make the world more efficient and interactive and interesting.” At the same time he worries about the potential for being disconnected from reality. He does agree, however, that AR is a technology that promises to augment humanity, and that hopefully should result in people spending less time looking at the small screen and more time looking at the world around us.
