Is this much to do about nothing? How substantial would a quote have to be to even be noticed?
https://www.bespacific.com/generative-ai-plagiarism-and-copyright-infringement-in-legal-documents/
Generative AI, Plagiarism, and Copyright Infringement in Legal Documents
Cyphert, Amy, Generative AI, Plagiarism, and Copyright Infringement in Legal Documents (May 10, 2024). WVU College of Law Research Paper No. 2024-14, Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, Vol. 25 (2024), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4938701 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4938701 – “Lawyers are increasingly using generative AI in their legal practice, especially for drafting motions and other documents they file with courts. As they use this new technology, many questions arise, especially surrounding lawyers’ ethical duties with respect to the use of generative AI. Headlines have been dominated by lawyers who have been disciplined for failure to confirm the output of generative AI systems, wherein the system hallucinates fake cases that the lawyers submit to opposing counsel and the court. Although that problem is certainly noteworthy, there are other potential issues for lawyers that have been more overlooked. The focus of this article is on two intriguing intellectual property questions that emerge when lawyers choose to use large language models like ChatGPT. First, might these lawyers be engaging in actionable, discipline-worthy plagiarism? This is unlikely to be the case, for several reasons, chief among them that copying and using boilerplate forms is standard practice in law. Nonetheless, courts and disciplinary agencies have reached surprisingly different conclusions on what counts as plagiarism in the practice of law and whether it is permissible. Any lawyer using generative AI should bear this in mind. Second, could these lawyers potentially be liable for copyright violations? Although this outcome may be unlikely, it is absolutely possible especially if lawyers do not understand that these tools can reproduce copyrighted text verbatim or if courts adopt some of the most aggressive arguments that plaintiffs are making in the current generative AI copyright infringement lawsuits working their way through the court system.”
Why would anyone voluntarily document their crimes?
Oversight Report Says More Than A Third Of Frisks Performed By NYPD Officers Were Unconstitutional
Over on TechDirt, Tim Cushing writes:
More than a decade ago, the NYPD was sued successfully over its stop-and-frisk program. A federal court found the program routinely violated rights and disproportionately targeted minorities. Judge Shira Sheindlin ordered a number of reforms to the program and it was placed under federal oversight.
Since then, the NYPD hasn’t changed much about how it handles these interactions. Officers were required to document these stops and provide demographic information about those stopped and/or frisked. It refused to do this.
It was ordered to more closely adhere to the Constitution. It didn’t do this either. Instead, the number of stops/frisks declined precipitously… at least on paper. But if cops weren’t filling out the forms, that meant an untold number of stops were happening every year. And that meant the new, radically lower number of stops was probably an illusion.
Read more at TechDirt.
Resource.
IBM will train you in AI fundamentals for free, and give you a skill credential - in 10 hours
… I'm telling you this because if any company has the cred to offer a credential on AI fundamentals, it's IBM.
IBM's AI Fundamentals program is available on its SkillsBuild learning portal. The credential takes about 10 hours to complete, across six courses.
Because I have long had an interest in AI ethics (I did a thesis on AI ethics way back in the day), I took the AI ethics class. It was good.
No comments:
Post a Comment