Expertise · Software and AI
AI, Software and Intellectual Property Expert
Software and AI disputes require a precise account of what was created, by whom, from which inputs, under what license, and with what technical evidence of copying, transformation or independent development.
Questions for the technical record
- What code, model, dataset or output is actually at issue?
- What do repositories, commits, build artifacts and deployment records establish?
- Which open-source components and licenses are present?
- Can the claimed human or machine contribution be reproduced or verified?
Evidence reviewed
- Source repositories and commit history
- Dependency manifests, package locks and license records
- Model documentation, prompts, training-data records and output provenance
- Build pipelines, access logs and product requirements
- Technical comparisons and reproducibility tests
Legal-technical perspective
Leo wrote his law thesis at Maastricht University on intellectual property and open-source software, an early intersection of his legal training with technology and software. He combines that foundation with extensive experience building and operating software-dependent technology businesses.
Public sources
Engagement-specific evidence is reviewed under appropriate confidentiality and scope controls.
For counsel
Discuss the technical record.
Engagements are subject to conflicts and scope review. Initial enquiries are treated as confidential.
Contact Leo Herps ↗