Updating Law Journal Submission Guidelines

I recently mentioned to local law journal editors that their Submission Guidelines may need to be updated to address the implications of AI.

Surveying the Options

First, I think it is important for journal editors to have it on the radar that AI generated journal submissions are a distinct possibility.

This will require editorial boards to have a proactive conversation about how to handle such submissions.

In my mind, there are a few options available. Here is some language that editors might consider:

Option 1: Submissions shall not contain any AI generated content.

or

Option . . . [more]

On March 27, 2024, Windsor Law Professor Pascale Chapdelaine released her latest article on the very interesting topic of algorithmic personalized pricing.

Pascale Chapdelaine, “Algorithmic Personalized Pricing: A Personal Data Protection and Consumer Law Perspective” (2024) 102 Can Bar Rev (forthcoming, online via SSRN).

Here’s more information about the article:

“Price is often the single most important term in consumer transactions. As the personalization of e-commerce continues to intensify, the law and policy implications of algorithmic personalized pricing i.e., to set prices based on consumers’ personal data with the objective of getting as closely as possible to their maximum willingness . . . [more]

In the article “AI’s Next Frontier“, author Bernard Marr discusses the future of Brain-Computer Interfaces. Over the years, surgical methods have evolved to the point where people can now experiment with implanting sensors into the human brain and collect data.

Marr writes “Today, one of the best-known pioneers is Neuralink, founded by Elon Musk…It aims to enable people suffering from paralysis to use machines and prosthetic limbs to recover their mobility…[Another company, named NextMind] has developed a device that translates signals from the visual cortex into digital commands. As well as creating tools that allow computers to . . . [more]

AI – the discussion points keep coming!

I just spent about 15 minutes of my day stripping my face off the internet!
That includes asking Google and Edge to remove cached images of my face.

Why the heck would I do that?

Here’s why:

Taryn Plumb, “Face Off: Attackers are Stealing Biometrics to Access Victims’ Bank Accounts” (February 21, 2024).

“…cybersecurity company Group-IB has discovered the first banking trojan that steals people’s faces. Unsuspecting users are tricked into giving up personal IDs and phone numbers and are prompted to perform face scans. These images are then swapped out with AI-generated . . . [more]

Last semester, with increasing agitation in the media about AI’s potential impact on the legal profession, I decided to wade in and show my students a little AI in my law school classroom. The course is Advanced Legal Research.

The Experiment

I gathered up a list of interesting readings on the topic of AI and the legal profession. Many of them pointed to horror stories or emerging policies and guidelines in the area. Later I decided to record my findings in my AI Regulation LibGuide.

I made all of this available in an optional readings folder.

AI Panel Weighs

Customer service is in decline. In my opinion, the problem is worse with large organizations.

I skimmed the surface in my last post “The Robots are Already in Control (Part One)“.

Companies that are primarily internet-based are the worst. One of my major pet peeves is a corporate website that has no phone numbers. For many, at best the customer service phone line is almost unfindable – buried four clicks into the site. I’ve even gone so far as to phone the “company” side of the business (the side that deals with shareholders), because there was no . . . [more]

Last week, as I was preparing for our joint Windsor Law and EPICentre conference “Disruptive Technology: AI and Its Impact on the Legal Profession and the Automotive Industry – What Path(s) for Regulation“, this article flew by:

Jackie Davalos, Dina Bass, and Bloomberg, “Chatbots Keep Going Rogue as Microsoft Probes AI – powered Copilot that’s giving users bizarre, disturbing, even harmful messages” (Fortune, February 28, 2024). The original Reddit post shows a variety of outputs that interested users received.

First of all, some of them did acknowledge that the whole thing could be a hoax. However, Microsoft’s response, . . . [more]

Good morning Colleagues!

La version française suit.

We are writing to you on behalf of the Canadian Association of Law Libraries AI Working Group (WG).

The WG is responsible for developing guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in legal technologies, including both commercial and non-commercial databases. The databases anticipated to be covered would be those that use legal information sources (statutes, regulations, cases, commentary, and other sources) as their primary data source.

At this time, we are soliciting feedback from the legal profession.

Your feedback is important to the process, and will be used to help frame our final . . . [more]

In my last blog post “The Robots (AI) Are Already in Control (Part One)” I reminded users about the headaches involved with system migrations. Our working lives are already controlled by technology. This was to set the stage for the next part of the conversation.

Before I go down that rabbit hole, let me say that I appreciate technology, but I am a late adopter. I’d rather let everyone else pour time and money into sorting out new technology issues, and then adopt after the kinks have been worked out. Automating my working life is a fun question that I’m . . . [more]

The robots are already in control. Having witnessed several systems migrations, I’ve been saying this for at least a decade.

Robots Gone Mad

Remember how the Phoenix pay system wreaked havoc on public servant pay back in 2016? Did you know that system has cost more than $2.4 billion? The problems persisted well into 2022. A full timeline for implementation was nicely set out by the Ottawa Citizen.

Now think about Ontario’s Social Assistance Management system. It cost over $294 million to build and fix after being implemented in 2014. Major issues were experienced as a result. . . . [more]

It’s been fun pulling together regulations and standards for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in legal applications over the past few months!

CALL/ACBD AI Working Group

Last fall, I proposed a working group (WG) through the Canadian Association of Law Libraries (CALL/ACBD).

Ultimately, the CALL/ACBD Executive did approved an Artificial Intelligence WG, whose terms of reference are on the CALL website. We are a group of 13 law librarians from across the country, representing a variety of interested parties, from firms, to academia to courthouse and legislative libraries. Our focus is primarily on AI in legal research and writing applications. Our . . . [more]

This submission is part of a column swap with the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) bimonthly member magazine, AALL Spectrum. Published six times a year, AALL Spectrum is designed to further professional development and education within the legal information industry. Slaw and the AALL Spectrum board have agreed to hand-select several columns each year as part of this exchange. 

Wouldn’t it be great if there were a worldwide, standard taxonomy—adopted by all major vendors, firms, and clients—to make legal data interoperable? Well, happily for us all, just such a taxonomy exists. It’s called SALI. And this standard taxonomy/ontology . . . [more]