AI content generators have gained significant attention in the legal field, raising expectations about their potential to interpret the law, enhance access to justice, facilitate legal communication, and support decision-making processes. However, legal scholars Nicolas Vermeys and Karim Benyekhlef, from Université de Montréal’s Faculty of Law, argue that the introduction of tools like ChatGPT has raised crucial concerns regarding the control and use of AI in the legal domain. In this article, we will examine the potential risk factors associated with AI content generators and explore their limitations in providing accurate legal information.
Vermeys highlights a fundamental challenge in using AI content generators in the legal field – the law’s regional specificity. Unlike medical or scientific disciplines, the law applies within specific regions or territories. For instance, Canadian criminal law only has jurisdiction within Canada, while Quebec’s civil law operates solely within Quebec. Unfortunately, AI tools like ChatGPT, although trainable, could potentially provide incorrect legal information due to the under-representation of particular regions within training datasets. Consequently, the effectiveness of AI content generators in the legal domain is significantly diminished by the challenges of regional variations in the law.
Vermeys also raises concerns about the design of AI content generators like ChatGPT, which prioritize providing likely answers rather than the most accurate ones. This design choice inherently compromises the authenticity and reliability of the information generated. Vermeys shared an example where he asked ChatGPT to cite his five most important published studies, and it falsely referred to non-existent publications, including one that wasn’t even his. This highlights the potential for AI content generators to produce fabricated or inaccurate results. Ensuring the accountability and responsibility for such misleading information becomes a significant concern when deploying these tools in the legal profession.
Controlling Content and Legal Implications
With the emergence of AI content generators, a critical question arises: how can we control the information generated by these software tools? Vermeys highlights the issues of copyright infringement and the potential inclusion of personal information in AI-generated answers. Who should be held accountable for any copyright violations? Is there a risk of breaching someone’s privacy through the responses generated? These legal nuances raise substantial challenges and demand careful consideration when utilizing AI content generators in the legal field.
Benyekhlef, while acknowledging the risks, sees the potential for AI content generators to enhance access to justice. The Justicebot tool developed at UdeM’s Cyberjustice Laboratory is an example of how this technology can provide individuals with information about their rights. Additionally, the development of online conflict resolution platforms like PARLe, which has resolved 65% of submitted disputes, showcases the positive impact of AI tools in common, low-stakes cases. However, Benyekhlef highlights the importance of involving legal experts in complex cases due to the risks of fabricated information that AI content generators can produce.
Both Vermeys and Benyekhlef point out that AI content generators lack the ability to consider perspective and foresight necessary for constructing a robust legal argument. While many assume that AI eliminates bias and treats everyone equally, Benyekhlef argues that this blanket approach overlooks the need for nuanced interpretations. The interplay of the human element in the legal profession requires the expertise of legal professionals to weigh the complexity and implications of legal cases comprehensively.
AI content generators undoubtedly offer potential benefits in the legal field, such as facilitating access to justice and providing legal assistance in low-stakes disputes. However, challenges related to regional specificity, authenticity, content control, and the limitations of AI-generated responses persist. As the legal profession moves forward, it is crucial to strike a balance between leveraging the capabilities of AI and preserving the expertise and nuanced perspectives that only legal experts can provide.
Leave a Reply