[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
An ENR article<\/a> reported that the agentic AI provider Trunk Tools<\/strong> lost its API access to Procore in September. According to ENR, Agave (a data integration platform) informed Trunk Tools and other startups that Procore\u2019s new terms required changes to how they used its data connector. Procore says the change is due to its updating the\u00a0API terms and conditions\u00a0and introducing a new\u00a0Developer Policy, aiming at protecting the integrity and security of all its customers\u2019 data.<\/p>\n This incident illustrates the tricky relationship between AI startups and incumbents. Both benefit from each other, but the collaboration is not without caveats. Sometimes it can be an existential question for the startup.<\/p>\n The Trunk Tool episode also poses an essential question in construction technology: Who truly controls the data powering AI innovation?<\/p>\n When generative AI became popular, several startups emerged that used AI on construction data. Their challenge was obtaining that raw material. Some startups collected and used data they acquired directly from customers. However, a practical solution for others was connecting to large design and project management platforms where customers were already present, using APIs to access their data.<\/p>\n Riding on top of the existing platform\u2019s data also offers the advantage of accessing a well-established customer base. Customer acquisition, the most challenging task for a startup, becomes significantly easier this way. The large company gains from this mutual relationship, as it retains its customers who enjoy additional benefits from startups\u2019 services.<\/p>\n As we\u2019ve seen, relying on other platforms carries risks because they can change their terms of service at any time. In the worst case, a startup may lose its ability to serve its customers as it currently does.<\/p>\n The common belief is that startups disrupt established companies. They tend to be more innovative, move quickly, and generate enthusiasm that large corporations rarely produce. But when it comes to AI, incumbents can disrupt the startups.<\/p>\n AI-powered startups face a big challenge when they base their business on somebody else\u2019s platform. Incumbents can add new features that mimic what the startup offers. When a startup creates something customers like and use, it shows that a real need exists. A large company can naturally buy the smaller one if it makes sense. But if the startup\u2019s innovation isn\u2019t protected or is superficial, the bigger company can copy their success.<\/p>\n Arvind Veluvali<\/a> discussed this threat in his article titled Hard Truths from Procore Groundbreak 2025<\/a>. He shared his thoughts on Procore\u2019s Groundbreak event: \u201cProcore\u2019s launch of Helix, AI Agents, and their Developer Portal presents an existential threat to a generation of incredibly well funded construction tech startups. [\u2026] One might argue that Trunk Tools, Datagrid, and others have a better product. That might be the case, but distribution usually beats innovation.\u201d<\/p>\n So, what can startups do to avoid becoming obsolete or run over? They can patent their technology or try to create a technological moat to protect it. But, as Jeevan Kalanithi told me on the AEC Business podcast, \u201cany moat can be defeated.\u201d<\/p>\n Creating excellent user experiences has been effective for me. When users can get started quickly and have an intuitive experience instead of relying on a lengthy user\u2019s manual, even large clients are more willing to switch. Additionally, providing good and responsive customer service is a winning approach.<\/p>\n Integration is essential, but don\u2019t build your house on rented land. Owning the data-collection pipeline (e.g., sensors, IoT, job-site capture) makes you independent of a platform. Being platform-agnostic is another strategy that can make you less vulnerable.<\/p>\n Many SaaS or platform agreements state that the \u201ccustomer owns the customer data\u201d or \u201cthe data you upload\/input remains your property.\u201d At the same time, these agreements frequently grant the provider the right to host, process, analyze, aggregate, and, if applicable, anonymize the data for the purpose of providing the service or improving it.<\/p>\n The contract may also allow the provider to set access, redistribution, sublicensing rules, or even to restrict or change access. For instance, in SaaS agreements, the provider may retain rights to \u201coutput data\u201d or derived data, or to limit what the customer can do with the data after termination.<\/p>\n So, it is advisable to read the terms and conditions carefully, whether you\u2019re a customer or a third-party service provider using customers\u2019 data on a SaaS platform. I\u2019m sure that, given the rapidly changing AI and security environment, SaaS companies will review and update their terms more frequently than before.<\/p>\n These contractual nuances determine not only present rights but also how the next generation of AI systems will interconnect.<\/p>\n I don\u2019t know whether investors assessing construction-AI startups have included \u201cplatform dependency risk\u201d in due diligence. If not, I\u2019m sure they will in the future.<\/p>\n I\u2019ve previously discussed<\/a> the agentic AI future where agents work together and access data sources using open standards. Technically, this is possible, but the main question is how user terms for platforms, apps, and data sources will enable it.<\/p>\n Anyway, AI has created an entirely new landscape where startups, incumbents, and most importantly, users of the systems must learn to navigate.<\/p>\n<\/div>\nThe question of data<\/h2>\n
Incumbents disrupting startups<\/h2>\n
What can startups do?<\/h2>\n
Read the license<\/h2>\n
The data-driven future<\/h2>\n