Hacker (Non)Court: Seymore, Inc. v. ThinkIz, Inc.
Andrea Matwyshyn, Carole Fennelly, Jonathan Klein, Elizabeth Wharton, Jessica Wilkerson, Desirae Satterlee
ShmooCon XX (Final) · Day 3 · Bring It On
This ShmooCon talk, "Hacker (Non)Court: Seymore, Inc. v. ThinkIz, Inc.," presents a captivating mock arbitration that delves into the complex legal and ethical ramifications of cybersecurity failures in a joint venture. The session features a panel of legal and industry experts who role-play a dispute between a traditional eyewear giant, Seymour Inc., and a fledgling AI software startup, ThinkEyes Inc., following a catastrophic product failure. The core of the arbitration revolves around assigning liability for severe user injuries and fatalities caused by a security breach in their jointly developed "Cyberware" — AI-enabled eyewear.
AI review
Let's be clear, this isn't a talk about a zero-day or some clever shellcode. If you came here for that, you're in the wrong room. This is about what happens *after* the zero-day hits, when the lawyers get involved, and people are dead. The scenario itself – AI-enabled eyewear with "blink-to-pay" and calendar integration, built on a napkin deal with an open-source vulnerability and a North Korean threat actor – is so painfully plausible it hurts. It's the kind of over-hyped, under-secured product I see vendors push every day, and this talk ripped into the consequences with brutal efficiency…