Every general counsel over the course of his or her career will face the need to conduct an internal investigation into events at the company. Many of these may be routine in nature, such as matters dealing with individual employees or human resources issues.
You are defending a recently acquired company in a litigation. As part of pre-acquisition diligence, and prior to the litigation commencing, executives from your client and the company that acquired it shared analysis of facts relevant to the litigation. Now that the acquisition is complete, to what extent can these communications be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine or the common-interest exception to waiver?
When determining if a general counsel’s conduct amounts to obstruction of justice, the question is that of intent, and the answer may depend on the statute used by prosecutors and the federal circuit where the act occurred.
Whether good or bad, the law is used by some to obtain or retain advantages over others, like education, money and politics. Over short and medium time frames, access to AI—and access to better AI—will likely skew toward those who can afford to supplement quality human legal advice for their separate advantage.
Open source software imparts a number of benefits, including decreasing product development time, distributing development across a community and attracting developers to your organization. However, some organizations shy away from it due to perceived risks and disadvantages around intellectual property.
There is a significant difference between providing an accurate or even a thorough legal answer, and providing a legal opinion that is strategic, that is likely to be trusted and followed by the client, that does not create additional liability for the client and that zealously protects the client's legal rights.
To drive somewhere, all you have to tell an automated car is your destination, the rest is technology, albeit complex amazing and sometimes patentable technology. Given any two physical coordinates, the same technical solution should be applicable to any human passenger. However, when legal issues are involved, a human client may not be able to articulate a preferred outcome and also usually needs advice on what results are even possible. A lawyer thus needs a lot more information, and an AI needs a lot more complex, amazing and sometimes patentable technology.
If we are increasingly willing to consign our fortunes to the advice of artificially intelligent financial advisers and place our mortal survival in the hands of robo surgeons and driverless cars, when should we entrust our legal rights to robo-lawyers?
On Aug. 8, Judge Shira Scheindlin published an op-ed in The New York Times discussing the statistical truth that law firms have poor representation of women attorneys as first-chair trial lawyers. Titled, "Female Lawyers Can Talk, Too," Judge Scheindlin's piece observed that progress at private law firms has stalled. Backed by data collected by the New York State Bar Association, Scheindlin's observation is not merely anecdotal.
Whether it's machine learning, behavioral algorithms, suggestive or voice-recognized searches or autonomously powered self-driving vehicles, companies around the globe are using different forms of artificial intelligence (AI) to improve user-product experience. It should come as no surprise to find that corporate legal departments—and the outside firms on which they rely—are following suit.