Does ChatGPT-4 Have Dementia?, AI Law Librarians, 2/28/24
Is it just me, or has ChatGPT-4 taken a nosedive when it comes to legal research and writing? There has been a noticeable decline in its ability to locate primary authority on a topic, analyze a fact pattern, and apply law to facts to answer legal questions. Recently, instructions slide through its digital grasp like water through a sieve, and its memory? I would compare it to a goldfish, but I don’t want to insult them. And before you think it’s just me, it’s not just me, the internet agrees!
Brazilian city enacts an ordinance that was secretly written by ChatGPT, AP News, 11/30/23
A city ordinance in Porto Alegre, Brazil, was revealed to be written by OpenAI's ChatGPT without the knowledge of city council members. Councilman Ramiro Rosário utilized ChatGPT to draft the proposal, presenting it unchanged to the council. Despite concerns about AI-generated content, the ordinance was unanimously approved. The incident has sparked debate on the role of artificial intelligence in public policy, with some advocating for transparency in acknowledging AI involvement in drafting legislation.
Harvard Law School Professor Finds ChatGPT Invents Fake Law Less Than The Supreme Court, Above the Law, 11/28/23
This article discusses ChatGPT's performance in responding to inquiries about campaign finance law posed by Lawrence Lessig. While ChatGPT accurately reflected existing caselaw on SuperPACs, it struggled with an opening answer that didn't align with constitutional history. Lessig's follow-up questions highlight ChatGPT's limitations and the importance of refining its knowledge base. The article emphasizes the potential of legal AI but cautions against overreliance on existing caselaw, pointing out the risk of echoing flawed legal reasoning.
Why I Use ChatGPT To Tell Me Things I Already Know, Law 360, 11/6/23
Despite the known risks of hallucinations, this article highlights the potential value of using ChatGPT as a memory aid for lawyers. It emphasizes that, in many situations, the demand for perfect accuracy is not necessary, and ChatGPT can efficiently provide memory joggers or suggestions. The author advises lawyers to use ChatGPT mindfully, recognizing its strengths and limitations, and suggests that, when strategically employed, it can enhance productivity without sacrificing accuracy in legal tasks.
ChatGPT-4 Can See Us Now! And Our Desiccated Potatoes..., AI Law Librarians, 10/19/23
This blog post discusses the release of ChatGPT-4 and its advanced capabilities, including its ability to generate more coherent and context-aware responses. The author also humorously explores the idea that ChatGPT-4 may be capable of "seeing" users' actions through their text inputs and making humorous references to potential AI misunderstandings. The post reflects on the evolving landscape of AI and its potential impact on various aspects of life and communication.
Federal Judge Forbids Use of ChatGPT by Out-State-Lawyers, Reason.com, 6/29/23
This article discusses a federal judge's decision to forbid the use of ChatGPT by out-of-state lawyers. U.S. District Judge Alan Albright in Texas issued an order stating that out-of-state lawyers appearing in his court may not use AI-generated drafting tools like ChatGPT, except when partnered with a Texas-licensed attorney. The judge's order argues that AI tools can lead to the practice of law by unlicensed individuals, posing ethical and professional responsibility concerns. The article examines the potential implications of this decision and the broader debate surrounding AI in legal practice.
A lawyer used ChatGPT to cite bogus cases. What are the ethics?, Reuters, 5/30/23
A New York lawyer could face sanctions for drafting a brief with the help of ChatGPT that cited six non-existent court decisions. The brief was filed in his client's personal injury case against Avianca Airlines. Schwartz admitted to relying on the technology and was "unaware of the possibility that its contents could be false." The American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct do not explicitly address AI but existing ethics rules apply. Lawyers are responsible for ensuring the technology they use provides accurate information and must not rely too heavily on AI tools to prevent introducing mistakes.
No ChatGPT in my court: Judge orders all AI-generated content must be declared and checked, TechCrunch, 5/30/23
A federal judge in Texas has mandated that attorneys appearing in his court must certify that no GenAI drafted any portion of their filing or that if AI was used, it was checked by a human for accuracy. This move comes after attorney Steven Schwartz used ChatGPT for legal research, which led to the generation of fictitious cases. The judge's requirement seeks to address concerns about AI hallucinations and potential bias.
ChatGPT Goes to Law School, Journal of Legal Education, revised 5/19/23
How well can AI models write law school exams without human assistance? To find out, we used the widely publicized AI model ChatGPT to generate answers on four real exams at the University of Minnesota Law School. We then blindly graded these exams as part of our regular grading processes for each class. Over 95 multiple choice questions and 12 essay questions, ChatGPT performed on average at the level of a C+ student, achieving a low but passing grade in all four courses. After detailing these results, we discuss their implications for legal education and lawyering. We also provide example prompts and advice on how ChatGPT can assist with legal writing.
The Implications of ChatGPT for Legal Services and Society, The Practice Magazine, March/April 2023
This article delves into the implications of ChatGPT for the legal profession and society. It discusses how generative AI, like ChatGPT, is transforming the legal landscape, offering benefits such as improved legal research and document drafting. It also raises concerns about issues like accuracy, bias, and the potential displacement of human lawyers. The article emphasizes the need for responsible and ethical use of AI in the legal sector, underlining that ChatGPT and similar tools are valuable aids but should not replace the crucial role of human legal professionals.
Judge asks ChatGPT to decide bail in murder trial, New York Post, 3/29/23
A court in India made a groundbreaking decision by consulting ChatGPT, specifically GPT-4, to determine whether a defendant in a murder and assault trial should be granted bail. Judge Anoop Chitkara sought ChatGPT's legal expertise regarding the jurisprudence of bail in cases involving cruelty. ChatGPT provided detailed information on bail considerations and emphasized the presumption of innocence in the justice system. The judge ultimately denied the defendant's bail request based on the evidence of cruel assault. This marks a significant development in the use of AI in legal decision-making.
How Lawyers Can Use ChatGPT 4, ChatGPT Prompts, 3/15/23
This article provides an overview of how lawyers can utilize ChatGPT-4 in their legal practice. It discusses potential use cases such as drafting legal documents, obtaining legal research assistance, and getting explanations on complex legal issues. It emphasizes the importance of using AI responsibly in the legal field and highlights the benefits of ChatGPT-4 for legal professionals.
ChatGPT - What are the risks to law firms?, Legal IT Insider, 3/14/23
This article discusses the risks associated with using ChatGPT in law firms. It highlights concerns regarding the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated content, as well as the potential for AI to inadvertently generate confidential or sensitive information. The article also touches on the risk of overreliance on AI tools, which could result in lawyers abdicating their professional responsibilities. It calls for a cautious and thoughtful approach to integrating AI into legal practices while maintaining ethical standards and data security.
Does ChatGPT produce fishy briefs?, ABA Journal, 2/21/23
This article examines whether ChatGPT is capable of producing legal briefs that hold up to professional scrutiny. It discusses concerns that AI-generated briefs may contain inaccuracies, lack sufficient legal analysis, or produce text that seems "fishy" or fabricated. The piece also highlights the importance of legal professionals carefully reviewing and verifying AI-generated content to ensure its quality and accuracy, raising questions about how AI can best be integrated into legal practice.
How ChatGPT and Generative AI Impact Legal Writing and Research Courses, ALWD Virtual Front Porch, 2/17/23
This article explores how ChatGPT and generative AI are influencing legal writing and research courses. It discusses the potential of AI to assist students with legal writing and research tasks, making it easier for them to generate documents, perform legal analysis, and even enhance their writing skills. It also highlights concerns about overreliance on AI tools, emphasizing the need for legal educators to balance AI's benefits with the development of students' critical thinking and legal writing abilities.
ChatGPT Is Scarily Good At Answering Legal Questions, Above the Law, 2/15/23
This article discusses ChatGPT's proficiency in answering legal questions and its potential implications for the legal industry. It highlights how ChatGPT can generate detailed and contextually relevant responses to a wide range of legal queries, making it a valuable tool for legal research. It also acknowledges the need for users, particularly legal professionals, to critically evaluate the information provided by AI models like ChatGPT and verify its accuracy, given that these tools may not always offer entirely reliable or up-to-date information. The article underscores ChatGPT's growing role in legal research and the importance of understanding its strengths and limitations in the legal domain.
ChatGPT Is Impressive, But Can (and Should) It Be Used in Legal?, Legaltech News, 12/15/22
This article explores the impressive capabilities of ChatGPT but questions whether it should be used in the legal field. It highlights the potential pitfalls, including concerns about accuracy and ethical considerations. While ChatGPT offers substantial advantages in legal research and drafting, it suggests that careful evaluation and oversight are crucial for its effective and responsible use in the legal industry.