|
Listen to this story
|
An AI arguing a case in the court of law could seem like a scene from a science fiction movie, but it’s closer to reality than ever. A US-based legal tech firm DoNotPay’s AI-based legal advisor will debut in an actual court case for the first time.
DoNotPay founder Joshua Browder took to Twitter to disclaim that he will “pay any lawyer USD 1,000,000 with an upcoming case in front of the US Supreme Court to wear AirPods and let our robot lawyer argue the case by repeating exactly what it says”. The recent development is intriguing because it could open the door for the larger use of AI in the justice system and possibly, one day, replace lawyers.
These claims, in the present day, could seem a bit far-fetched; however, technology is evolving so fast that the possibility cannot be overruled.
How can AI fight cases?
Case in point: DoNotPay’s AI-based legal advisor is all set to assist a person charged with a speeding ticket. So, how will it be done? The person in question will represent himself in the court; however, he will be connected with the AI advisor on the phone, with his earpods on. The AI, dubbed as the ‘world’s first robot lawyer’, will coach the defendant through his earpiece on what to say to get out of the consequences of a speeding charge.
In most jurisdictions across the globe, connecting to a computer or a smart device would not be allowed in a court of law; however, the legal tech firm has found a way around it. The jurisdiction where the case will be heard is not disclosed yet, but the defendant will be allowed to use his earpiece as a hearing aid.
The case is a kind of trial, according to Browder. The company has also agreed to cover all charges for the defendant, including the fines if imposed by the court. Additionally, Browder is testing his AI advisor in another speeding ticket case that will take place on the video conferencing platform Zoom.
GPT-3 comes into play
DoNotPay has built its AI advisor leveraging the GPT-3 architecture by OpenAI. According to Browder, the AI has been trained to stick to facts instead of making a plausible argument for the sake of winning the case. “We’re trying to minimise our legal liability, and it’s not good if it actually twists facts and is too manipulative,” he told New Scientist.
He further revealed that it took his firm a lot of time to train the AI on the vast amounts of case law needed to make it useful.
Can AI really replace lawyers?
Now, with the advent of ChatGPT, there are debates raging about whether AI will replace content writers, developers, and even lawyers. In a paper titled ‘GPT Takes the Bar Exam‘, the researchers document their experimental evaluation of the performance of GPT-3.5, on the multistate multiple choice (MBE) section of the US bar exam.
“While our ability to interpret these results is limited by nascent scientific understanding of LLMs and the proprietary nature of GPT, we believe that these results strongly suggest that an LLM will pass the MBE component of the Bar Exam in the near future,” the researchers conclude.
However, Matthew Miner, an associate attorney at Allen & Korkowski & Associates, intrigued by the paper decided to test ChatGPT on the same topic. In a blog post, he concluded, “Relying on GPT would obviously be malpractice, and I am not worried about that changing soon. I believe, at least for the near future, my job is very secure and will likely remain LLM free.”
Further, there are many ethical aspects to be considered before an AI could potentially replace lawyers in a court of law. The use of AI could also lead to a lot of biases creeping into the justice system.
Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, an independent think-tank, published a research paper last year highlighting that the integration of AI in the justice system requires a comprehensive legal, regulatory and ethical framework to establish trust in these technologies.
However, if Browder’s vision is fulfilled, his AI will replace lawyers, especially in lower courts. “A lot of lawyers are charging way too much money to copy and paste documents, and I think they will definitely be replaced, and they should be replaced,” he asserted.
