September 26, 2026, (Inside AI) — Perplexity AI faces a new lawsuit accusing the company of stealing trade secrets tied to "wake word" technology, the voice activation system that lets users summon an AI assistant by speaking a trigger phrase.
The complaint was filed by DaVoice, a startup that develops voice activation tools, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The case is docketed as DaVoice v. Perplexity AI Inc., No. 3:26-cv-10909. The lawsuit was filed on September 25, 2026, according to court records.
DaVoice is represented by Davida Brook and Ian Crosby of the law firm Susman Godfrey. Attorney information for Perplexity was not immediately available. Perplexity has not publicly responded to the allegations, and Inside AI could not independently verify the claims.
The dispute centers on wake word technology, the software layer that continuously listens for a specific phrase such as "Hey Siri" or "Alexa" without sending all ambient audio to the cloud. This technology is critical for AI assistants because it balances responsiveness with privacy and power consumption. Perplexity, known for its AI-powered answer engine, has expanded into voice interactions and hardware, making wake word capabilities a core part of its product strategy.
Read: AI Antitrust Lawsuit
Why Wake Word Tech Is A Legal Battleground
Wake word detection has become a valuable intellectual property asset as AI assistants move from phones to smart speakers, cars, and wearables. The technology involves complex machine learning models that run on low-power chips, often trained on proprietary datasets of voice commands. Companies that develop these systems guard their methods closely because they can be difficult to replicate without access to the original training data and model architectures.
DaVoice is not a household name, but its lawsuit signals that smaller firms are willing to challenge well-funded AI companies over alleged misappropriation. Trade secret cases differ from patent disputes because they do not require a granted patent. Instead, they hinge on whether confidential information was improperly acquired or used. If DaVoice can show that Perplexity obtained its trade secrets through a relationship or unauthorized means, the startup could seek damages and an injunction against Perplexity's use of the technology.
The case also highlights a broader trend: as AI companies race to build voice-enabled products, they often rely on third-party technologies or hire engineers with expertise from other firms. That mobility of talent and technology can lead to legal conflicts. In recent years, trade secret lawsuits have become more common in the AI sector, with companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft involved in disputes over voice and speech recognition technology.
Perplexity has grown rapidly by offering an AI search engine that provides direct answers with citations. The company has raised hundreds of millions in venture funding and launched a mobile assistant app. Its expansion into voice and hardware would naturally require wake word detection, either developed in-house or licensed. The lawsuit suggests DaVoice believes Perplexity chose a third path: taking its secrets.
Legal experts note that trade secret cases can be lengthy and fact-intensive. DaVoice will need to identify specific secrets, show that it took reasonable steps to protect them, and prove that Perplexity used improper means to acquire them. Perplexity will likely argue that it developed its technology independently or that the information was not confidential.
The outcome could affect how AI companies source voice technology. A ruling in favor of DaVoice might encourage more startups to enforce their trade secrets against larger players. Conversely, a dismissal could reinforce the idea that independent development is a valid defense, even when similar technologies exist.
Read: OpenAI Agent Breaches Health Portal
For now, the case is in its early stages. No hearing date has been set. Perplexity has not filed a response. DaVoice's legal team at Susman Godfrey has experience in high-stakes intellectual property litigation, having represented clients in trade secret and patent disputes.
As AI assistants become more ubiquitous, the legal battles over their underlying components will likely intensify. Wake word technology may be just the first front in a wider conflict over the building blocks of conversational AI.
