Jacob Canter

Counsel | He/Him/His

Overview

Jacob Canter’s practice focuses on privacy, cybersecurity, intellectual property, and the burgeoning field of artificial intelligence (AI). Leveraging his experience across these areas of law, Jacob helps companies succeed through strategic counseling on how to comply with the laws, negotiations and licensing to support business transactions, and litigation when disputes arise.

Privacy and cybersecurity. Jacob helps companies navigate general and subject-matter-specific privacy and cybersecurity laws. Working alongside his clients, he builds privacy and cybersecurity programs based on data minimization principles and best industry practices. He has successfully resolved dozens of privacy class action and data breach disputes for clients—always with the goal of keeping costs and liability as low as possible. And he regularly assists clients responding to threat actor attacks.

Jacob routinely counsels clients on compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), HIPAA, SEC Rule 17a-4, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

Artificial intelligence. Within the field of AI, Jacob has exceptional experience. He is an active participant in Crowell’s AI Steering Committee, a diligent monitor of AI policy, and a team member on the first AI litigation case in the United States to reach the trial phase. He counsels startups and the largest companies in the world on compliance with existing AI laws and helps companies prepare for pending and proposed AI laws as well.

His global guidance covers the EU AI Act, the CA AI Transparency Act, NY LL 144, the CO AI Act, CA’s automated decision-making technology (ADMT) regulations, and proposed AI laws and regulations such as ILL HB 3773 and CA SB 53.

Intellectual property. Using industry best practices and leading edge legal guidance, Jacob helps companies protect their most important copyright and trade secret IP. He drafts and negotiates IP licensing terms, including open source licensing terms, for clients. And he has successfully defended multiple companies in high-stakes copyright and trade secret cases.

In a notable case in the District of Delaware, Jacob successfully defended a worldwide video-sharing platform by achieving a settlement more than thirty-times smaller than the opening demand. Through his experience, Jacob not only safeguards clients' valuable IP assets but also provides strategic value beyond immediate results.

Beyond these core areas of law, Jacob counsels clients on compliance with the laws governing internet conduct and website design. He also handles commercial contract disputes, founders disputes, competition allegations, fraud claims, warranty claims, and employment claims.

After starting his career at a global law firm in Washington, D.C., in 2019, Jacob clerked in the Southern District of New York for the Hon. Judge Lorna G. Schofield.

Career & Education

    • Reed College, B.A., Phi Beta Kappa, 2014
    • University of California, Berkeley School of Law, J.D., 2018
    • Reed College, B.A., Phi Beta Kappa, 2014
    • University of California, Berkeley School of Law, J.D., 2018
    • California
    • District of Columbia
    • California
    • District of Columbia

Jacob's Insights

Webinar | 10.16.25

The Artificial Intelligence Agenda from Capitol Hill to State Capitals: Where We Are and Where We Are (Probably) Going

The landscape of AI governance and regulation is shifting. Following the release of the White House’s “America’s AI Action Plan” in July 2025 and the President’s signing of related Executive Orders, the White House has emphasized (at least rhetorically) a preference for innovation, adoption, and deregulation. But that does not tell the entire story. The Administration remains committed to exercising a heavy hand in AI, including by banning the U.S. government’s procurement of so-called “woke AI,” intervening in the development of data centers and the export of the AI technology stack, imposing an export fee for certain semiconductors to China, and assuming a stake in a U.S. semiconductor company. State legislatures are also racing to implement their own regulations, particularly around AI’s use in critical areas, such as healthcare, labor and employment, and data privacy. The many sources of regulation raise the specter of a fragmented compliance environment for businesses. This webinar will delve into the Administration’s AI strategy, going beyond the headlines to analyze:...

Representative Matters

  • Defending legal AI innovator ROSS Intelligence Inc. against copyright and tortious interference allegations involving whether a party may copy judicial opinions. Brought antitrust counterclaims alleging an impermissible tying arrangement, which have survived the pleadings.
  • Successfully defended legal technology innovator Proctorio Inc. against federal copyright law claims and allegations that the client violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
  • Bringing copyright, federal antitrust, and local competition claims against multinational companies on behalf of Xinuos Inc., a UNIX-based server operating system company.
  • Providing ongoing counseling and guidance related to data breach incidents, compliance with federal and state data breach laws, and litigation liability risks attendant to incidents.

Jacob's Insights

Webinar | 10.16.25

The Artificial Intelligence Agenda from Capitol Hill to State Capitals: Where We Are and Where We Are (Probably) Going

The landscape of AI governance and regulation is shifting. Following the release of the White House’s “America’s AI Action Plan” in July 2025 and the President’s signing of related Executive Orders, the White House has emphasized (at least rhetorically) a preference for innovation, adoption, and deregulation. But that does not tell the entire story. The Administration remains committed to exercising a heavy hand in AI, including by banning the U.S. government’s procurement of so-called “woke AI,” intervening in the development of data centers and the export of the AI technology stack, imposing an export fee for certain semiconductors to China, and assuming a stake in a U.S. semiconductor company. State legislatures are also racing to implement their own regulations, particularly around AI’s use in critical areas, such as healthcare, labor and employment, and data privacy. The many sources of regulation raise the specter of a fragmented compliance environment for businesses. This webinar will delve into the Administration’s AI strategy, going beyond the headlines to analyze:...

Jacob's Insights

Webinar | 10.16.25

The Artificial Intelligence Agenda from Capitol Hill to State Capitals: Where We Are and Where We Are (Probably) Going

The landscape of AI governance and regulation is shifting. Following the release of the White House’s “America’s AI Action Plan” in July 2025 and the President’s signing of related Executive Orders, the White House has emphasized (at least rhetorically) a preference for innovation, adoption, and deregulation. But that does not tell the entire story. The Administration remains committed to exercising a heavy hand in AI, including by banning the U.S. government’s procurement of so-called “woke AI,” intervening in the development of data centers and the export of the AI technology stack, imposing an export fee for certain semiconductors to China, and assuming a stake in a U.S. semiconductor company. State legislatures are also racing to implement their own regulations, particularly around AI’s use in critical areas, such as healthcare, labor and employment, and data privacy. The many sources of regulation raise the specter of a fragmented compliance environment for businesses. This webinar will delve into the Administration’s AI strategy, going beyond the headlines to analyze:...