As we enter 2024, the legal industry continues to grapple with the implications of generative artificial intelligence (AI). The technology, which saw significant advancements in 2023, poses a range of challenges and opportunities for legal professionals. Three critical areas remain particularly uncertain, demanding attention and strategic foresight from the legal community.
Data Dilemmas in AI Training
The question of where to source high-quality, ethically obtained data for training language models (LLMs) is increasingly pertinent. Legal tech vendors and law firms have been actively integrating generative AI tools to streamline tasks like legal research and document analysis. However, John Brewer, AI officer and chief data scientist at HaystackID, highlights a pressing issue: accessing authentic discovery data without compromising client confidentiality. This dilemma underscores the need for novel solutions that balance data privacy with the effective training of AI models.
Copyright Controversies Surrounding AI
Generative AI has also stirred debates around copyright law. 2023 witnessed a slew of lawsuits and sanctions involving AI-generated content, questioning the boundaries of fair use and copyright protection. A notable case filed by the New York Times against OpenAI and Microsoft at the end of December 2023 has become a focal point, examining the fine line between AI ‘learning’ and ‘copying’. This area is particularly fraught with legal complexities, as tech companies providing generative AI tools often indemnify their clients against copyright infringement, a strategy that might not hold up under increasing litigation risks.
Defining AI in Legal Terms
Judicial responses to generative AI use in legal work have brought to light the ambiguity surrounding the definition of AI. Various U.S. courts have issued standing orders mandating AI technology disclosures, but there’s confusion about whether generative AI falls within this scope. Maura Grossman, a research professor at the University of Waterloo, points out that the rapidly evolving nature of AI technology could render detailed court orders obsolete. There is a growing call for standardized definitions and guidance from regulatory bodies like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and potential amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are being considered to accommodate the evolving role of AI in legal processes.
Conclusion: A Dynamic Legal Landscape
As generative AI continues to transform the legal industry, practitioners are urged to remain vigilant and adaptable. The challenges around data training, copyright law, and defining AI necessitate a proactive approach. Whether through leveraging new forms of data sourcing, navigating the complex terrain of intellectual property law, or understanding the evolving judicial perspective on AI, legal professionals must equip themselves to manage the dynamic shifts brought on by this groundbreaking technology. In doing so, they will ensure their practices not only comply with current standards but are also prepared for future developments in this rapidly changing field.
