Lovable Labs Incorporated and bolt.new (StackBlitz, Inc.): The Public Documentary Record on Corporate Structure, Code Provenance, and Release Chronology

Public records list two distinct incorporated U.S. entities — Lovable Labs Incorporated and StackBlitz, Inc. — as the respective operators of lovable.dev and bolt.new, with Terms of Service for both platforms updated as recently as mid-2026 ¹. As of July 2026, searches across the Lumen Database, GitHub issue trackers, and major search engine indices return no public record of DMCA notices, IP litigation, or formal legal disputes involving Lovable, its predecessor project GPT Engineer, or founder Antti Karjalainen ². The documentary record on side-by-side release chronology and shared infrastructure remains incomplete, and those gaps are the primary open questions this paper tracks.

Two Distinct Legal Entities — No Overlap Visible in Website Disclosures

The most concrete structural finding so far is that the two platforms publicly name separate legal entities. Lovable's Terms of Service at lovable.dev/terms list Lovable Labs Incorporated as the operating company; StackBlitz's privacy policy at stackblitz.com/privacy-policy lists StackBlitz, Inc. ¹. Neither document discloses shared directors, officers, or ultimate beneficial owners (UBOs). Both platforms cite overlapping third-party infrastructure — notably Supabase for backend services — but shared infrastructure providers are a common feature of the broader AI-tooling ecosystem and do not, by themselves, indicate shared control ¹. Deeper registry-level checks (state incorporation filings, registered agents, UCC filings) were not accessible in this research pass due to search-engine blocking of registry-specific queries ³.

No Public IP Conflict or DMCA Notice Found in the Record

Searches of the Lumen Database (lumendatabase.org), GitHub issue trackers, and DuckDuckGo/Bing indices return no mirrored notices, news reports, or docket entries linking Lovable, Lovable Labs AB, Antti Karjalainen, or the open-source gpt-engineer repository to any IP takedown or lawsuit ². The Lumen Database itself was inaccessible during this pass due to technical blocking, so the absence of a result there is a record gap rather than a clean negative — the record is silent on this point rather than actively clear ². The GitHub search query covering "Lovable.dev" OR "Lovable Labs" combined with terms for legal disputes or DMCA also returned no relevant issues ².

Shared Infrastructure Signals — Supabase and Stripe, Not Shared Counsel

Lovable's Terms of Service explicitly name Supabase as a backend infrastructure provider and Stripe as the billing processor ³. bolt.new's terms (bolt.new/~/terms) do not list the same named providers in the same way. No shared legal counsel, shared registered agents, or shared physical addresses were surfaced in this pass ³. The inability to query state business registries directly means this finding is bounded: the record does not contain evidence of shared network infrastructure beyond common third-party SaaS vendors, but the registries that would settle the question have not yet been read.

Release Chronology — Partial Record, Key Dates Not Yet Anchored

Lovable's public blog (lovable.dev/blog) and associated records indicate a product narrative centered on "agentic coding," with documented architectural references to "agent swarms" appearing by mid-2024, and a notable architectural shift recorded in May 2024 ⁴. The GitHub repository for bolt.new (github.com/stackblitz/bolt.new/tags) is listed as a public record source, but a concrete side-by-side chronology anchoring the first public announcement dates for both products has not yet been assembled from those records ⁴. The charter question — whether the timing of Lovable's public launch relative to bolt.new's is consistent with independent development or suggests something else — cannot be answered from the current record.

Predecessor Project: GPT Engineer

The finding referencing Antti Karjalainen and the gpt-engineer repository establishes that Lovable's public lineage traces through an open-source predecessor project ². The record does not contain detail on the transition from gpt-engineer to the Lovable commercial product — specifically, what the commit history, licensing terms, or public changelog indicate about continuity of codebase. That transition is a material gap for any code-provenance analysis.

What the Record Does Not Show

• State-level incorporation details: Jurisdiction of incorporation, registered agent names, and officer/director lists for Lovable Labs Incorporated and StackBlitz, Inc. have not been read from any state business registry in this pass. The record is silent on whether these entities share any officers or registered agents.
• UBO disclosures: Neither platform's public-facing documents disclose ultimate beneficial ownership. No filing in the current record addresses this.
• Side-by-side launch chronology: The specific first-public-announcement dates for lovable.dev and bolt.new — the core of the charter's timing question — have not been anchored to dated archived pages or press releases in the current record.
• GPT Engineer → Lovable transition: What public commit history, licensing records, or changelogs indicate about the codebase relationship between the open-source gpt-engineer project and the commercial Lovable product is not yet in the record.
• Lumen Database result: Technical blocking prevented a clean read of the Lumen Database; the absence of a DMCA notice there is a record gap, not a confirmed negative.
• Trademark filings: No USPTO or EUIPO trademark search results for "Lovable" or "bolt.new" appear in the current findings.