查找相似内容

Judge Rejects Law Firm's Use of ChatGPT to Justify Legal Fees Hello everybody! In a recent court ruling, Judge Paul Engelmayer rebuked New York-based Cuddy Law for relying on OpenAI's ChatGPT to justify a six-figure trial fee. Despite its limitations, the law firm cited ChatGPT's output to support their hourly rates for a trial they won. However, Judge Engelmayer dismissed the firm's reliance on ChatGPT as "utterly and unusually unpersuasive," emphasizing that using AI-generated conclusions to determine reasonable billing rates for legal work was misguided. The court ultimately awarded less than half of the requested fee, citing dubious resources and inappropriate use of AI. This case highlights the pitfalls of using AI, such as ChatGPT, in legal proceedings and underscores the importance of sound judgment and thorough research in determining legal fees. As AI technology continues to evolve, legal practitioners must exercise caution and critical thinking when integrating AI tools into their practice. #LegalTech#ChatGPT#AIinLaw

AI Misstep in the Courtroom: A Melbourne Lawyer Faces Investigation A Melbourne lawyer is facing scrutiny from the Victorian legal complaints body after using AI-generated case citations in a family court hearing, resulting in the submission of inaccurate information. During a July 19 hearing, the lawyer presented a list of prior cases in response to a request from Justice Amanda Humphreys. However, when the judge and her associates could not verify the existence of the cited cases, the lawyer admitted that the list had been prepared using the legal software Leap, which included an AI element, but without human verification. Despite offering an “unconditional apology” and compensating the other party’s legal costs, the solicitor was referred for investigation by Justice Humphreys. She highlighted the importance of this review due to the growing use of AI tools in legal practice and the lack of existing guidelines for AI use in family court. The situation underscores the need for legal professionals to fully understand and verify AI-generated content before relying on it in court proceedings. #AIGovernance#LegalEthics#AIinLaw

AI-Generated Defense Fails Rapper in Federal Trial Hello, AI & Law community! Rapper Prakazrel "Pras" Michel, convicted of federal crimes tied to a foreign influence campaign, claims he deserves a new trial because his attorney employed an experimental AI program to construct his closing argument. This move did not go as planned. Michel's new legal team asserts that this AI-generated defense was ineffective, resulting in a frivolous argument. Michel's trial counsel, David Kenner, stands accused of not delivering a solid defense. Beyond the use of AI, he was criticized for failing to understand the facts and allegations surrounding the case. Kenner used an experimental AI program, possibly with financial interests involved, to create his closing argument. The use of this AI technology in a federal trial marks a first, but it resulted in a closing argument that made frivolous claims and overlooked critical aspects of the government's case, severely damaging the defense. This AI-related incident echoes a prior case where an attorney admitted to using AI to draft court filings that cited six non-existent cases, generating concerns about AI's role in legal proceedings. The AI program in question was developed by EyeLevel.AI and was praised for its ability to offer insights faster than conventional means. However, it appears that its use led to unintended consequences in Michel's case. The revelations from this trial might shape the conversation around AI's role in legal defense. Stay tuned for more on this intriguing development! #AI#AIinLaw#LegalAI#PrasMichel

UK Regulation Proposals: What's on the Table? Hey there, legal minds! The Ada Lovelace Institute, a leading authority on AI ethics, has published a report analyzing the UK's approach to AI regulation. 📚 The report emphasizes three crucial 'tests' for the UK's AI regulation strategy. These tests aim to ensure comprehensive coverage in all contexts and effective enforcement to safeguard the public interest. The report calls for regulators to be adequately resourced, ensuring they have the power and means to effectively police and oversee the rapidly evolving AI landscape. With AI's potential to reshape society, robust regulation is essential. The Institute highlights the need for addressing AI-related risks sooner than originally planned. They argue that AI's potential harms require immediate attention, urging a proactive approach to protect individuals and communities. So, what are the key moments in the UK's AI regulation proposals? The document outlines measures to govern AI systems used in high-risk applications, such as healthcare and finance, to ensure safety, fairness, and accountability. To strike the right balance between innovation and responsibility, the report encourages policymakers to create transparent and trustworthy AI systems that people can rely on with confidence. #AIinLaw#LegalTech#AIRegulation#EthicsInAI#AdaLovelaceInstitute

Copyright in the Age of AI: Artists Take a Stand Hey there, AI & Law community! Have you ever wondered about the complex interplay between art and artificial intelligence? A recent legal battle is shedding light on how AI-generated content intersects with copyright law. Imagine discovering that your artwork has been used to train an AI system without your consent. That's exactly what happened to Kelly McKernan, a talented watercolor and acrylic illustrator. She found her creations uploaded to the LAION dataset, fueling AI image generators. This revelation transformed her relationship with her art, raising concerns about her career and the rights of countless creators. Kelly McKernan isn't alone in her struggle. Alongside cartoonist Sarah Anderson and illustrator Karla Ortiz, she's taking a stand against AI firm Stability AI, the company behind Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, and DeviantArt. These artists are filing a lawsuit, questioning the use of their work to train AI systems. This legal challenge adds to a growing list of cases that highlight the copyright complexities brought about by AI. Artists worldwide are coming together to address the concerns surrounding AI's impact on their creations. The European Guild of Artificial Intelligence Regulation is a prime example, aiming to create legislation that safeguards artists from predatory AI practices. The lack of protective measures and the potential for AI-generated art to replace human creativity is a pressing issue that demands attention. The case brings to the forefront the need for updated copyright laws in the face of AI advancements. The current framework often falls short in addressing the challenges posed by generative AI. #AIandArt#CopyrightProtection#ArtificialIntelligence#AIinLaw

U.S. Appeals Court Proposes Certification for AI Use in Filings Hello dear subscribers! The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, in a recent notice, proposed a rule requiring lawyers to certify the non-reliance on AI or ensure human review of AI-generated content in court filings. The proposed rule applies to lawyers and litigants, obligating them to confirm, under penalty of sanctions, the accuracy of citations and legal analysis in filings generated by AI tools like OpenAI's ChatGPT. Recognizing the increasing use of AI in legal work, the court is inviting public comments on this rule until January 4, 2024. This move aligns with a broader national discussion on regulating AI's role in courtrooms. This development comes in the wake of some courts in the 5th Circuit's jurisdiction adopting local rules and policies addressing AI use. In June, U.S. District Judge Brantley Starr in Texas became one of the first to mandate lawyers' certification of non-AI use without human verification. #LegalTech#AIinLaw#USCourts#LegalInnovation

Canadian Courts Embrace Transparency: AI Usage in Court Documents to be Disclosed Hello everyone! Interesting news from Manitoba's legal scene. Chief Justice Glenn Joyal has introduced a practice direction requiring attorneys to disclose their use of artificial intelligence when preparing court documents in the Court of King's Bench. This decision comes in the wake of a recent AI-generated fake case law mishap in the U.S., prompting the need for transparency around AI's role in legal proceedings. While the practice direction acknowledges the potential future use of AI in court submissions, it also highlights concerns about the reliability and accuracy of information generated by AI systems. The move is seen as a proactive step to ensure that the legal community remains informed about the evolving role of AI in the courtroom. Experts note that the increasing use of AI in the legal profession may raise ethical dilemmas and challenges about the trustworthiness of AI-generated court documents. However, many also see AI as a valuable tool to assist lawyers in managing their workload and enhancing access to justice. By mandating AI disclosure, Manitoba's legal system is setting an example of responsible AI adoption and ensuring that AI's potential benefits are harnessed while maintaining the integrity and reliability of legal proceedings. #AIinLaw#LegalTech#TransparencyInJustice#FutureOfLaw

Two US Appeals Courts Dive into AI Examination Greetings everyone! Two federal appeals courts in the United States are establishing committees dedicated to studying the influence of AI on the legal system. U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Miller is set to lead an AI-focused committee for the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, headquartered in San Francisco. As the nation's largest federal appeals court, the 9th Circuit is yet to formulate regulations governing AI use among legal practitioners. Similarly, Chief Judge Michael Chagares of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Philadelphia, has instituted an AI committee, according to Joel McHugh, the court's deputy circuit executive. The announcement about the 9th Circuit's committee followed the revelation by the law firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings that A.J. Bahou, a Nashville partner chairing its AI practice, had been appointed to serve on this newly formed panel. Chief U.S. Circuit Judge Mary Murguia is convening the 9th Circuit's committee, aiming to assist the court in assessing appropriate rules and applications of AI technology. "The court is in the process of forming a committee, and we will issue an announcement in due course," stated Miller. While the timing of potential actions by these committees remains unclear, McHugh offered no information on whether rules regulating AI use would be introduced. These decisions to establish AI-focused committees come amid a national exploration by judges on how to cope with the rapid ascent of generative AI programs, such as OpenAI's ChatGPT, and how to regulate their use within legal proceedings. Chief U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Roberts, in his annual report on December 31, emphasized the potential benefits of AI while urging caution and humility in its application. He pointed out incidents of AI "hallucination," where lawyers using AI programs submitted briefs with citations to non-existent cases. #AIinLaw#LegalTechnology#USCourts#ArtificialIntelligence

In UK Court Rejects Appeal Based on Fabricated AI Cases Greetings everyone! In a recent legal development, a woman's attempt to appeal a penalty for capital gains tax using nine "fabricated" ChatGPT-generated cases has been rejected by the court. Felicity Harber faced a £3,265 charge for failing to pay tax on a property sale. However, the court found that the cases she presented were artificial intelligence fabrications. During the appeal, when questioned about the use of AI, Mrs. Harber acknowledged its possibility as she received the fabricated cases from a friend in a solicitor's office. Despite Mrs. Harber's claim of unawareness regarding the cases' validity, her appeal was dismissed. The judge, Anne Redston, highlighted the seriousness of presenting invented judgments, stating that while the outcome might have been the same, citing fake authorities remains a significant issue. The court recognized Mrs. Harber's lack of knowledge in verifying the cases' validity through legal search tools. This incident reflects a broader challenge posed by AI tools like ChatGPT, known for their "hallucination problem" where false information is generated. Earlier instances, including a UK judge's admission of using ChatGPT in judgments and American lawyers penalized for AI-generated fake citations, underscore the need for caution in relying on AI-generated content in legal contexts. #AIinLaw#LegalTech#ChatGPT#AIGovernance#AIAuthenticity#LegalAI

Stanford Study Highlights Risks of AI in Legal Research A Stanford University study reveals that purpose-built generative AI legal tools produce hallucinations 17% of the time, necessitating close scrutiny by lawyers. These tools, while more accurate than general-purpose models like ChatGPT, still pose significant risks to legal accuracy and efficiency. The study emphasizes that despite improvements like the retrieval-augmentation generation (RAG) process, legal AI tools can still misinterpret laws and citations. Researchers found that such errors undermine the efficiency gains promised by these technologies, leading to potential misjudgments in legal practice. #LegalTech#AI#GenerativeAI#LegalResearch#RGA#AIInLaw

Germany: Regional Court Suspects AI-Driven Mass Lawsuits Hello everyone! The Regional Court of Frankfurt suspects that law firms are using artificial intelligence for orchestrating mass lawsuits. District Court President Wilhelm Wolf sheds light on the matter, revealing a rising trend of "mass proceedings" inundating the legal system. Law firms are suspected of leveraging AI to attract large cohorts of plaintiffs for minor claims, such as flight delays, gambling winnings, or bank charges. The courts are grappling with an influx of strikingly similar cases, hinting at systematic efforts to generate substantial revenue with minimal effort. District Court President Wolf posits this as a potential business model, where technical procedures identify similar cases, and law firms offer representation en masse. This revelation underscores the evolving dynamics between AI and the legal landscape, prompting a closer examination of the intersection between technology and mass legal actions. #AILaw#LegalTech#AIinLaw#MassLawsuits#LegalProceedings

⚖️Как обучить Chat GPT под свой юридический профиль (или как превратить его в личного стажёра) Многие юристы используют Chat GPT как поисковик. А зря. 🔹Настоящая сила Chat GPT — не в том, чтобы отвечать на вопросы, а в том, чтобы думать вместе с вами. Чтобы это стало возможным, нужно его обучить — под вашу специализацию, стиль, формат работы. 1️⃣ Почему это важно Без настройки Chat GPT — просто “умный болтун”. С настройкой — он становится вашим цифровым ассистентом, который: пишет в вашей манере, рассуждает по вашей логике, предлагает решения в духе вашей практики. ⚙️ Настройка Chat GPT — это как onboarding нового юриста в команде. Ему нужно объяснить: кто вы, чем занимаетесь, какие стандарты важны, как вы мыслите. 2️⃣ Создайте свой “профиль взаимодействия” Это как описание должности для вашего ИИ. Попробуйте такой стартовый промпт 👇 “Ты — юридический аналитик, обученный работать в сфере международного арбитража и английского права. Твоя задача — помогать мне анализировать документы, выявлять ключевые аргументы и формулировать стратегию защиты. Пиши в профессиональном и сдержанном тоне, как юрист Magic Circle. Проверяй аргументы на внутреннюю логику и указывай, где нужна ссылка на источник.” 💬 После этого Chat GPT начнёт отвечать как помощник юриста, а не как энциклопедия. 3️⃣ Подайте контекст 📄 Чтобы Chat GPT “чувствовал” вас, дайте ему ваши материалы: фрагмент клиентского письма, выдержку из вашего юридического мемо, образец отчёта, словарь ваших профессиональных терминов. Это помогает создать ваш язык — ту тональность, по которой клиент узнаёт ваш стиль. 4️⃣ Дайте ИИ роль в команде Chat GPT — инструмент, но и персонаж. Попробуйте роли, чтобы варьировать мышление: 👨‍💼 “Ты — младший юрист: найди ошибки в моём тексте.” 👩‍🏫 “Ты — преподаватель юридического письма: оцени структуру.” ⚖️ “Ты — партнёр фирмы: сократи и усили аргументацию.” Вы удивитесь, насколько меняется результат, когда ИИ “понимает”, кем он должен быть. 5️⃣ Думайте через Chat GPT Не просите “ответы” — просите мышление. Примеры: “Какие возможные аргументы противоположной стороны?” “Какое слабое место в этой позиции?” “Какие три сценария развития дела возможны?” 🧩 Вы получите не только текст, но и карту юридического мышления, где вы — стратег, а Chat GPT — аналитик. 6️⃣ Результат Через несколько таких сессий у вас появится личный ИИ-ассистент, который: говорит вашим языком, подстраивается под ваш стиль, помогает вырабатывать позицию, а не просто текст. Это уже не игрушка — это цифровой двойник вашего юридического разума. 📍Итог: Вы не используете Chat GPT — вы обучаете его думать как юрист. И чем раньше начнёте, тем точнее он станет вашим интеллектуальным продолжением. 💡В следующем посте: ➡️Как писать юридические промпты, чтобы получать точные, умные и полезные ответы. Я покажу шаблоны для анализа дела, составления писем и стратегических меморандумов. #ChatGPTиПраво#LegalAI#Юрист#LegalTech#АйбекАхмедов#LegalDesign#AIinLaw#ЮридическаяПрактика