How using AI to resolve your legal problems can put you at risk
Our inboxes and social media feeds are flooded with information about AI, some content encouraging the use of AI to run your life for you and other content warning you about the use of it.
A topic of conversation that continues to arise is how AI fits into the legal profession. And like most other industries, AI has its place, but as with anything, proceed with caution.
AI has its advantages. We won’t take that away from you.
We certainly see that AI has its advantages. Do we think that AI will replace actual lawyers? No. Will it change the way in which we work? Perhaps.
What advantage does AI have on the legal profession?
Used right, it can:
· Produce quick summaries of information such as case summaries;
· Assisting in drafting of letters;
· Conduct basic legal research;
· Increase speed and efficiency;
· Proofread documents;
· Assist with identifying areas to be considered in a matter.
These things are certainly advantages. But does this mean that AI does a lawyer’s job and, in some cases, quicker? Should clients not be charged what they would normally be charged in the absence of AI? Absolutely not. Here’s why.
The problem with using AI to get answers
AI is run on systems of inputs and complex algorithms. If the input is not sufficient or fulsome, then the output can only be in consideration of that limited input. Does that give you the actual or truest answer to the issue? Most likely not.
As the old saying goes, “there is always two sides to a story”. In the case of using AI to get an answer to a legal problem, is the information given to AI only one side of the story? Is AI given the information the user wants to give it to get the answer they want to hear? Does you actually understand the minor details of the issue that weigh heavily on the result? Would the answer be different if it knew both sides of the story? Or, if it referenced a particular piece of legislation or case law?
These are all questions that a lawyer has the experience to ask. But an AI user wanting to find a solution to their legal problem so they don’t have to pay a professional might not be asking themselves these questions or may not be experienced enough to understand this.
Many legal problems are not matters where there is a clear-cut answer. If it were, then you probably wouldn’t be turning to AI to help or consulting a lawyer for that matter. Even if the law says there is a clear-cut answer, that doesn’t mean that will be the result. Most experienced lawyers know that. But anyone who is not a sophisticated user of legal services, may not. There are nuances in all areas of law and one small fact can change everything.
We know that inevitably AI will be a part of the legal professional role and we see that it is a big part of people’s lives also. But like anything there are pros and cons, and understanding the risks of AI is crucial to understanding that AI cannot replace human intelligence and experience. A lawyer can detect where AI is incorrect.
What are these risks we speak of?
The risks are:
· Legislation being given by AI as a reference to justify its answer may not apply to this jurisdiction or even this country. Would you know how to check this? Would you know if is it the correct legislation or how that legislation interacts with other legislation?
· The security of sensitive information that is being input into an AI system that is most likely crucial to obtain accurate information or responses. How do you know where this information is being kept and whether it is secure? Or is sensitive information being withheld for security purposes which is then yielding an incorrect response because it does not contain all the facts?
· AI systems get it wrong. There is a warning on most AI systems. Can you sue a lawyer if they get it wrong. Possibly. But can you sue AI for giving you the wrong answer? No. We asked AI how many days of the week contain the letter “d”. It told us 6 days with Tuesday being the only day that doesn’t. Need we say more?
· AI does not know and understand the detailed intricacies of a matter or the client that can be often crucial to resolving legal issues. It completely lacks humanness. Which is sometimes what is needed to resolve some matters. And in our experience, a lot of the time clients do not know these important aspects either. And they’re not expected to, otherwise they would be lawyers themselves!
· AI is not provided with all of the crucial details. Quite often it is the smallest details that are the determining factor in a matter. The absence of this information can yield a very different or incorrect response.
· Not knowing where the AI system in use draws its data from;
· The list goes on.
A Legal Professionals Role and AI. How do they fit together?
As we said earlier, we do not believe AI will replace the role of a legal professional. Will it change the way we work? Probably. Will AI do the work for us, and we can just charge the client? No way.
AI can assist us, sure. However no two matters are the same. AI can certainly be used a guide, a starting point or used as a reference, however it cannot give tailored advice that factors in every single detail of a matter.
How do legal professionals come to understand the small and intricate details of a matter that truly count? Through their human interaction with their clients and experience in other matters. Legal professionals are trained to ask the right questions to obtain the right information that is crucial to a matter. Through experience, legal professionals learn how to speak to clients, how to interact with them, what information is needed and how to extract that information that is needed. A computer system lacks that same ability. Whilst it can reference legislation and case law, it cannot connect on a human level.
Back to the question of AI and lawyer’s costs. Why won’t the use of AI reduce fees lawyers charge their clients?
Put simply, because a lawyer still has to do the work. We still need to have the knowledge and experience to understand what input is required for AI to produce accurate results. We still need to have the knowledge and experience to understand the complex issues that arise in a matter. We still need to check the information AI produces to see if it is correct and accurate. Does this all reduce the time we spent on a matter? Not necessarily. We may not spend as much time researching, or writing, but our time will be spent on fact checking, editing and including advice on crucial areas that are particular to a certain matter that AI did not consider.
So does the way in which our role might change mean we should not charge as much. No. We still require the same skills, knowledge, experience and training. Does the value to you change if we use a computer system to assist with delivering the same result to you? We don’t believe so. So, should a lawyer’s costs be reduced because they use AI to assist them? We think not, because AI does not reduce the amount of work they do, it just changes the way in which they do it.