We may be in the midst of a revolution in the legal profession. Generative AI is perhaps as impactful on the practice of law as the introduction of email. The use cases are endless and growing by the day, given how transformative this technology is in improving the efficiency and quality of providing legal services to clients. So ubiquitous is AI's use in law that the ABA has released its Formal Opinion 512 on Generative AI Tools and lawyers' ethical duties regarding it. With more use cases seemingly daily, learning about AI can feel like drinking from a firehose.
Here are a few must-know points about AI to get you started and some ethical duties to consider regarding AI use.
AI has a multitude of use cases in law
To name a few, AI is useful in litigation e-discovery, categorizing documents as responsive versus non-responsive, contracts analysis, M&A due diligence purposes, and litigation strategy and analysis. In fact, more legaltech startup have raised impressive financing to create new use cases, including Harvey AI, which raised 100M in its latest financing round. Generative AI tools are particularly useful for legal research, due diligence, document review, regulatory compliance, and drafting briefs, letters, client communication, and other legal documents. Many use cases and incredible emerging opportunities exist to optimize each lawyer's practice.
Responsible use of AI requires considering the ABA's formal opinion of the ethical use of GenAI Tools in law
The ABA's formal opinion provides some ethical guidance for lawyers, touching on the level of competence, the duty of confidentiality, disclosure of your use of GAI to clients, and your review of tools' processes and outputs. Below are several points that apply to every lawyer's use of GAI.
Regarding the level of competence, the ABA's opinion is that "lawyers must have a reasonable understanding of the capabilities and limitations of the GAI tools that the lawyer might use" (p. 2-3). If you choose to use LLM tools like OpenAI's ChatGPT, you should have a reasonable understanding of its capabilities and limitations.
Regarding confidentiality: Lawyers should analyze the risk of loss of confidentiality to client's information when using these tools.
Regarding duty to disclose use to clients: ABA's formal opinion is fairly flexible regarding client disclosure, "in some circumstances, client disclosure may not be necessary" (p 8).
Regarding the review of outputs: Lawyers must review for accuracy all GenAI outputs before using it. With its Formal Opinion, the ABA has provided lawyers with a foundational set of ethical guidelines to consider as they responsibly integrate GAI tools into their practice.
It's a fast-moving space that requires continued learning and education
Innovation in AI is so fast-moving, now, more than ever. It is essential to stay updated on changes in the field, especially on how they could affect and improve your practice.
Phil Omorogbe will be moderating the next installment of BASF's Truth and Power Series "Responsible Artificial Intellgence" on September 26th. Learn more and register here.
