John Bliss 4/2/24.
Many lawyers seem wary about the idea of incorporating generative AI in their practice, often citing uncertainties about how the rules of professional responsibility might apply in this novel context. A leading national figure in bar regulation around emerging tech, Andrew Perlman, has written an authoritative article on this topic (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4735389), which should assuage some of these concerns. Perlman suggests that the rules of professional conduct do not prohibit use of this technology, although lawyers should be cautious on several points, including: (1) judicial orders that restrict use of generative AI; (2) the importance of learning to use the technology well, using the right tools for the right purposes, consistent with the duty of competence; (3) the confidentiality violation that may occur when inputting client information in systems that do not offer data privacy protections (Perlman notes that closed systems and some law-specific applications seem to offer adequate protections); (4) the communication duty, which may require consulting with clients about the use of generative AI, although this will likely change very soon as this technology enters the mainstream of legal practice. Looking to the future, Perlman suggests that the duty of competence may one day require lawyers to use generative AI, which will enhance the efficiency of their work. I recommend the article and hope it informs bar associations and a wide range of lawyers who might otherwise be deterred from using this technology.
Empirical Studies of AI Lawyering (e-SAIL) 