The Sony World Photography Awards of 2023 chose the entry of Boris Eldagsen to receive the first prize in its creative open category. Yet this German artist refused to accept the award. According to a CNN news article, this was because what he submitted was generated by an Artificial Intelligence or AI program.
AI can be defined as the simulation of human intelligence by software-coded problem-solving shortcuts. The topic of AI has recently generated buzz. If before it was only a theme of futuristic movies, now the concept is materializing in present-day reality. AI has not only affected the industries of manufacturing, media, and transportation, it has now found its way into the field of law.
OpenAI, a San Francisco-based AI research laboratory, launched ChatGPT in late 2022. This is a chatbot, which is an application that can imitate real-world and human-like functions. Some of these functions cover what comprises much of a lawyer’s work — drafting pleadings, reviewing contracts and writing memoranda, among others.
Since the possibilities for the development of AI are endless, one cannot help but weigh the pros and cons of using it. In an interview with Reuters, Suffolk University Law School Dean Andrew Perlman thought that much like conducting research in Westlaw and LexisNexis, first-year law students should learn about using ChatGPT as a tool in their legal research and legal writing classes.
However, just like any creation undergoing development, AI is far from being perfect. According to a recent national daily news article, an American lawyer is facing controversy when the court document he submitted cited six false cases generated by ChatGPT. He claimed that he was unaware that the AI program may produce fake content. As a result, he will be facing a sanctions hearing.
This is not the first time that AI has generated misleading content. Fake photos of former US President Donald Trump being arrested, as well as fake photos of Pope Francis wearing a puffer jacket, went viral on the Internet. With the plethora of information accessible online, it is getting harder to detect what is true and it is getting easier to fabricate what is false.
In an article published on the official website of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo revealed in a virtual meeting that the Court had proposed the use of AI for improving court operations. The proposal aims to build on the areas of preparation of transcripts of stenographic notes and digitalization of judgments that were already rendered.
Since it has been established that AI can further progress as a powerful tool, it begs to answer the question, “What lies ahead for us in the legal practice?”
As a new lawyer, I regularly use electronic legal research tools like CD Asia. Compared to the traditional way of going to the library, electronic tools greatly save time. How much more effort can be saved when one uses AI that can produce output by simply typing an instruction?
It is my humble opinion, however, that while AI programs indeed promise cost-cutting benefits, there is nothing wrong with sticking to our old ways of diligently doing our legal work, especially when AI research programs are still problematic. We must err on the side of caution when using Artificial Intelligence because the stakes are high when we talk about what we represent before the courts.
Putting myself in the shoes of clients, it would also be disconcerting if the lawyers they hired were charged for work that was only generated by an AI tool.
Artificial Intelligence truly has its potential in legal practice. But pertaining to the core of what lawyering is and what the profession means, nothing beats our human touch.
(Atty. Kristine Arlyce R. De Guzman just became a Member of the Philippine Bar in 2023. She received her Juris Doctor degree from the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law. She is currently an Associate at the Aranas Cruz Araneta Parker & Faustino Law Offices.)