Palantir sues former AI engineers for stealing $B source code

Palantir Technologies has filed a lawsuit against two former senior AI engineers, Radha Jain and Joanna Cohen, alleging they stole proprietary documents and information to launch a competing company called Percepta. The lawsuit, filed Thursday in Manhattan federal court, accuses the engineers of taking what Palantir describes as its “crown jewels,” including source code representing billions of dollars in investment, to create what the company calls a “copycat” competitor.

What you should know: Palantir claims both former employees had access to its most sensitive intellectual property during their tenure at the data analytics company.

• Jain and Cohen were described as being “entrusted with Palantir’s crown jewels,” indicating they held senior positions with significant access to proprietary technology.
• The alleged theft involves documents and information that Palantir says were used specifically to help launch Percepta as a competing firm.
• Palantir has invested billions of dollars in developing its source code and related technologies, making the alleged theft particularly significant from a financial perspective.

Why this matters: The case highlights growing concerns about intellectual property protection in the AI industry, where top engineering talent frequently moves between companies and proprietary algorithms represent enormous competitive advantages.

• As AI companies compete intensively for skilled engineers, cases involving alleged theft of trade secrets are becoming more common across the tech sector.
• The lawsuit underscores the high stakes involved when senior engineers with access to core technologies leave to start competing ventures.

The legal landscape: Trade secret litigation has become increasingly common in the AI space as companies seek to protect their competitive advantages.

• Federal courts have jurisdiction over such cases when they involve interstate commerce and significant financial damages.
• The outcome could set important precedents for how courts handle similar disputes involving AI intellectual property and former employees.