The Coming Legal Technology War
Esqs v Devs, There Will Be Blood
[Part One]
2 things seem abundantly clear to the observant person:
The practice of law as we have long understood it has incompatibilities with present society and development of technology, and lawyers are aware.
The development of technology, most especially the boom in #AI creates opportunities to develop tools which can supplement, and also probably replace many of formerly exclusively legal functions.
For instance, it is now possible to create a fully conversational chatbot which can inform the viewer on any of a wide variety of legal topics, helping them to learn more than they would ever know.
At the same time, the practice of law remains information-reservational in nature — lawyers do not share the things they know for fear of not being able to bill for being the holder of that information.
Unless we are not paying attention, or unless we are strident in our respective silos (tech is gonna tech, law is gonna law), there will be blood. Major suits and public action. Creeping “supervision of AI for the good of man” while inveigling the public to turn against technologists “practicing law.” Tech counter-offensives
Calling it. The Coming Legal Technology War is here and hot war has broken out.
New York Times v. (Microsoft and) OpenAI (ChatGPT): Summary OpenAI is the world’s vacuum cleaner for content and data basically trying to compile and parse everythingdata.
NYT alleges that OpenAI’s “unlawful copying and use” of NYT content [for training data and prompt engineering] in its ChatGPT LLM product is a violation of its Copyright.
“Billions of dollars in statutory and actual damages” Complaint and OpenAI’s Statement.
Excerpt
“Defendants’ unlawful use of The Times’s work to create artificial intelligence products that compete with it threatens The Times’s ability to provide that service. Defendants’ generative artificial intelligence (“GenAI”) tools rely on large-language models (“LLMs”) that were built by copying and using millions of The Times’s copyrighted news articles, in-depth investigations, opinion pieces, reviews, how-to guides, and more.
While Defendants engaged in widescale copying from many sources, they gave Times content particular emphasis when building their LLMs—revealing a preference that recognizes the value of those works. Through Microsoft’s Bing Chat (recently rebranded as “Copilot”) and OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Defendants seek to free-ride on The Times’s massive investment in its journalism by using it to build substitutive products without permission or payment.” 1:23-cv-11195 at 2
Due to well established doctrines of fair use, educational use, and “transformative use,” I’m not certain that NYT’s position is correct. I also think this probably had something to do with the Nov. 23 ‘Sama Drama’. [Let’s keep in mind Microsoft’s involvement, and that OpenAI’s parent co is a nonprofit.]
Regardless, there is also a meta narrative to consider. This Legal fight is the first LT hot war. OpenAI carries the very future of possibility of AI in its hands in how it handles this litigation. Simulation is at risk. OpenAI stands now for the rest of the AI community. Should it stand strong and “not negotiate with terrorists”? NYT is essentially seeking to be the first in the world to establish a “payment model” for content owners vis a vis ChapGPT which will inure to the governing of all the others.
The New York Times v. OpenAI The Biggest IP Case Ever Jan 2024 (Sunstein LLP)
Cynics may say it is fake and for show…
There are also rumors of war.
In coming editions we will talk more about these, along with proposing a profitable productive solution for all parties. Not a white flag. A red pill.
The AI Panic Escalates (with covert purpose in the coming LT War?) Sheer blithering inarticulate fear about AI has become convention; a current fad of cultural mimesis. Yet there is real reason to believe that it serves purposes…