Privacy group files complaints against Scale AI over worker surveillance

Legal complaints in Europe

The European digital privacy advocacy group noyb has launched a legal challenge against Scale AI. The group filed five separate complaints across France, Italy, the Netherlands, and Austria. These actions target the company's methods for monitoring the people who build AI models.

The complaints focus on Outlier, which is the specific platform used by the company. More than 900,000 freelancers use this platform to perform various tasks. These tasks are ultimately recorded to create training data for major tech clients including Google, Meta, and OpenAI.

Noyb is currently asking regulators to impose fines on Scale AI. They are also calling for a formal examination of how the platform assigns work to its massive pool of freelancers. Scale AI has not yet provided a response to requests for comment regarding these allegations.

Invasive tracking and data

According to reports seen by Reuters, the surveillance on these workers may be extensive. The complaints suggest that up to 19 different trackers follow freelancers while they are active on the platform. These trackers include tools that record keystrokes and mouse movements every few seconds.

An investigation by the research collective DiPLab found that this data collection is highly detailed. The group discovered that the resulting files could be reconstructed into a video. This would allow for a complete replay of a worker's entire session from start to finish.

Additionally, workers are required to provide sensitive personal information to the platform. They must submit ID documents and a face video to a firm called Persona for identity verification. The complaints argue these checks are invasive and repeated without any clear explanation to the users.

Work conditions and incentives

The research into Outlier also revealed how the platform manages its workforce through specific incentives. The system uses game-like mechanisms to keep workers engaged. Bonuses are a primary part of the incentive structure used to drive productivity among the freelancers.

Thomas Le Bonniec, who spent two years studying the platform for DiPLab, highlighted the lack of autonomy for these workers. He noted that freelancers do not choose their own schedules. Instead, they must work whenever the platform has tasks available and wants them completed.

Specific examples of these incentives include bonuses ranging from $100 to $200. These rewards are offered for completing 200 tasks within a 24-hour window. Le Bonniec cited interviews with workers during his investigation to provide these specific figures.

Biometric data and regulations

A major point of contention in the complaints involves the handling of biometric data. The privacy group argues that the identity verification processes break European rules. They claim the repeated collection of face videos and IDs lacks a proper legal basis under current protections.

The complaints also point to a history of similar issues with other platforms. For instance, the Italian data protection authority fined the delivery company Glovo in 2021. That fine was related to the use of gamification in a way that regulators deemed problematic.

The scale of the data involved is significant given the number of workers on the platform. By monitoring 900,000 individuals, Scale AI sits at a central point in the AI supply chain. The legal challenge seeks to determine if this level of monitoring is permissible under privacy laws.

Transparency and next steps

The complaints also highlight a lack of transparency regarding personal data requests. Between December 2025 and May 2026, four workers asked Outlier for copies of their personal data. None of these workers received a response from the company during that period.

Regulators will now need to determine if the surveillance techniques used by Scale AI violate privacy standards. The outcome could impact how AI companies manage the human labor required to train their models. It may also influence how other gig economy platforms handle worker data.

The investigation by DiPLab serves as a primary source for the specific tracking details. As the legal process moves forward, the focus will remain on whether the benefits of AI training justify the level of surveillance. The situation remains a key point of interest for digital rights advocates.