Exploring the use of AI in legal research, focusing on finding the right models for the right tasks, potential for lawyers to use AI in writing memos and briefs, concerns about government overreaction to AI use, copyright issues with AI, and the importance of being cautious about AI advancements.
AI tools like generative AI provide versatile capabilities but may offer suggestions over facts, leading to potential inaccuracies in legal research.
Proposed rules around AI usage in legal documents raise concerns about transparency and accuracy, highlighting the need for ethical considerations and verification processes.
Deep dives
AI and Legal Research: Distinction between Generative AI and Retrieval Augmented Generation
AI tools like generative AI, such as GPT-4 and Gemini, offer versatile capabilities, completing sentences based on statistical likelihood. While impressive, their major drawback is their design to suggest likely answers rather than fact-based ones. This distinction has created challenges, as evident in a case where a lawyer cited non-existent cases due to this feature. On the other hand, retrieval augmented generation tools like Vincent by VLEX utilize primary sources to answer queries accurately, addressing the shortcomings of generative AI. These tools have revolutionized legal research, offering specific and verifiable information efficiently.
Ethical Dilemmas in Legal AI Usage: The Fifth Circuit's Rule Debate
The Fifth Circuit proposed a rule regarding AI usage in legal documents, aiming to ensure transparency about the technology's role in research and writing. However, concerns were raised about the rule's alignment with addressing the core issue of inaccurate citations. The debate highlighted potential biases against AI use, especially for self-represented litigants who may lack access to reliable AI tools. Additionally, ethical obligations for lawyers using AI tools were underscored, emphasizing the need for proper verification and maintenance of competency.
Copyright and AI: Balancing Transformative Use and Ownership Rights
As AI tools increasingly rely on copyrighted material for training, the issue of copyright infringement arises. Drawing parallels with cases like Napster and Google Books, the question concerns whether AI's use of copyrighted content qualifies as transformative or infringing. This debate extends to legal research AI tools that leverage online resources, raising ethical and legal considerations regarding content ownership and fair use. The evolving landscape of AI integration poses challenges that prompt reflections on copyright law applicability.
Societal Impacts and Future Concerns: Navigating AI's Role in Human Development
As AI advancements redefine various sectors, including legal research, concerns about economic inequality, over-reliance, and societal impacts surface. The potential transformation in how tasks are accomplished through AI warrants a cautious approach to prevent widened inequality and over-dependence on technology. Reflections on inherent human capabilities, ethical dilemmas in AI deployment, and safeguards against misuse of AI underscore the need for responsible integration and vigilance towards its societal ramifications.
A special episode on artificial intelligence and the law, including how we find the law. Ed Walters, a pioneer in bringing AI to legal research, joins us to separate the artificial wheat from the chaff. He explains that a lot of the recent news about the failures of AI models have been due to using the wrong models for the wrong things, not the models themselves. He walks us through a near future when lawyers can use AI to not just find points of law but write memos or briefs. We’re also joined by IJ’s Paul Sherman, our resident AI aficionado, who recently wrote a letter to the Fifth Circuit about a proposed rule it has regarding AI use and brief writing. There’s a lot of promise out there but also a lot of danger in the government—including courts—overreacting. We also talk a bit about copyright issues and AI and what’s on the horizon. Are we approaching the Singularity? Ed thinks likely not, but there’s still worries we should be aware of.