11/22/2024: Legaltech's X-odus, the return of Litera's CEO, and more
Nov 27, 2024
auto_awesome
Julie Shabawale, a legal tech journalist, Caroline Hill, editor-in-chief of Legal IT Insider, and Joe Patrice, contributor to Above the Law, dive into pressing legal tech topics. They critically assess LexisNexis' AI shortcomings, raising concerns about accuracy in legal education. A bizarre story about a bear costume incident brings humor to their discussion. They also nostalgically reflect on social media shifts, particularly the rise of Blue Sky, and delve into potential antitrust actions against Google, setting the stage for significant changes in the tech landscape.
The introduction of new panelist Julie Shabawale aims to enrich discussions on evolving legal technology and innovation.
Law professor Benjamin Perrin criticizes the reliability of LexisNexis AI+, highlighting inaccuracies that could mislead law students in their studies.
A quirky legal case involving potential insurance fraud from a bear attack on luxury cars illustrates the unusual intersections of law and technology.
Deep dives
Introduction of a New Panelist
A new panelist, Julie Shabawale, joins the show to discuss legal tech and innovation. Julie is a legal tech journalist based in Canada and is known for writing for several publications, including the CBA National Magazine. The group expresses excitement about her regular contributions moving forward. This addition aims to enhance discussions on various aspects of legal technology and its evolving landscape.
Concerns Over LexisNexis AI+
Benjamin Perrin, a law professor from UBC, criticizes LexisNexis AI+ for producing inaccurate outputs, a problem he terms 'hallucinations'. He notes specific instances where the software generated fake legislation and used verbatim text from headnotes as case summaries. Perrin's experience raises alarms about the reliability of legal tech tools especially as they are considered for use by law students. LexisNexis responded to these criticisms, suggesting that some user prompts may not align with the product’s current capabilities and admitting a need for clearer messaging regarding its functionalities.
Implications of AI Errors in Legal Education
The panel discusses how the inaccuracies found in LexisNexis AI+ can have dire implications for law students who may rely on such tools as definitive sources. They emphasize that while seasoned professionals might recognize errors, novice students may not have the requisite knowledge to validate information. This concern about over-reliance on AI tools underscores the ongoing need for rigorous legal education that encourages careful vetting of sources. The panelists agree that training law students to critically assess AI outputs rather than take them at face value is crucial.
Bear-themed Legal Story
A quirky legal case involving a bear attack on luxury vehicles in Los Angeles captures the panel's attention. Owners filed insurance claims after a bear broke into several high-end cars, leading to significant payouts. However, further investigation revealed that the incident might have involved a human in a bear costume rather than an actual bear. This bizarre twist spurred the arrest of four individuals and raised questions about insurance fraud, proving to be an entertaining distraction amid serious legal discussions.
Antitrust Actions Against Google
The Department of Justice seeks to break up Google's dominance by potentially forcing the sale of Chrome, reminiscent of historical antitrust cases like Microsoft's in the 90s. The panel considers the wider implications of such actions, mentioning that various political factions now show interest in regulating large tech companies. The timing of this push coinciding with shifts in administration raises eyebrows among panelists regarding possible political motivations behind the actions. Overall, they highlight the importance of continued scrutiny and evaluation of big tech's influence in modern society.
