As an intellectual property and privacy attorney who has spent almost two decades at the intersection of law and technology, I have seen firsthand the profound impact that artificial intelligence (AI) is having on the legal industry. From streamlining mundane tasks to enhancing decision-making processes, AI is revolutionizing the way legal professionals operate.
The Promise of AI in Law
AI offers a lot of benefits to legal practice. It streamlines routine tasks, letting legal professionals focus on work requiring human judgment. Document review, contract analysis and legal research – tasks that are critical to legal work and traditionally consume significant time – can now be completed more efficiently with AI-powered tools.
For example, these new AI platforms can quickly sift through vast amounts of data to identify and synthesize relevant information, significantly reducing the time and effort required by legal professionals. This not only increases productivity but also lets lawyers focus on more strategic and value-added activities that leverage their expertise, emotional intelligence and counsel – skills that AI cannot replace.
Layering Generative AI within the context of a traditional legal claim can provide additional insights that might otherwise be missed. Predictive analytics, powered by machine learning algorithms, can analyze historical case data to forecast the likely outcomes of legal disputes, enabling attorneys to make more informed decisions about case strategy and settlement negotiations.
I can’t think of any attorney who would choose to spend their time sifting through countless emails, contracts or cases when, through AI tools, they could instead be strategizing and collaborating with their clients.
The Peril Behind the Promise
However, these benefits do not come without risks. There is not a single tool that I would recommend using as the basis for legal decisions without substantial human oversight. Attorneys have an ethical duty of competence, which now includes understanding AI’s capabilities and limitations. Delegation is not an option; as attorneys, we have an ethical obligation of technology competency. Our State Bar has been clear that it is our duty to keep up with all technology used in practice, including AI.
AI systems reflect the data they were trained on, which can lead to significant biases. For example, a company using an AI tool for hiring decisions found the system favored male candidates due to it being a historically male-dominated industry, creating an inadvertent gender bias with legal consequences had the AI tool been relied on without oversight.
This same risk of bias exists in legal applications, where AI might inadvertently perpetuate existing prejudices in case outcomes or legal advice. It is crucial for legal professionals to be vigilant about these biases and work toward developing more equitable AI systems.
Additionally, client confidentiality remains paramount in our profession. If we provide client information to an AI tool, there is a risk that this information could be misused or the confidentiality compromised. Legal professionals must make sure their AI tools meet strict privacy standards.
The ownership of AI-generated content creates another risk. The copyright office currently states that anything created by Generative AI does not qualify for copyright protection. There is also concern about AI tools using copyright-protected materials without permission to generate output. This raises questions about the ownership, infringement and reuse of AI-generated content, creating potential pitfalls for law firms and clients alike. Legal professionals must navigate these uncertainties carefully.
The Path Forward
It is imperative to have human oversight and accountability for all key decisions made using AI tools. AI tools must only be used to augment our legal expertise and judgment, not replace it. The human elements of legal practice – emotional intelligence, reasoning, and empathy – cannot be replaced by these AI tools. Clients don’t want to sit in front of a computer and talk about really difficult or personal topics. They want to look us in the eyes and feel confident that we can be their trusted advisor and account for all aspects – the data-driven and emotional ones – when crafting legal strategies.
It is also important for law firms to implement training programs. We did this a few years ago, and we have attorneys who have been practicing for 50-plus years learning alongside those right out of law school. With everyone evolving and learning at the same rate, a bonus to this approach has been the camaraderie and teamwork built across what can sometimes seem like vast generation gaps.
The AI revolution in law isn’t coming – it’s here. The question isn’t whether to embrace AI but how to do so responsibly. The greatest risk may be complacency – assuming that our profession’s traditional values will automatically transfer to an AI-augmented practice without intentional effort.
Angela Doughty, the leader of law firm Ward and Smith’s intellectual property practice section, is a N.C. State Bar Board Specialist in Trademark Law, a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP/US) and one of the inaugural recipients of the AI Governance Professional (AIGP) certification. Doughty also serves as the director of legal innovation for Ward and Smith, which has offices throughout North Carolina, including in Wilmington.
See other stories on Law:
District Attorney Lays Down the Law
Promise, Peril and the Path Forward: Legal Industry AI
Area Attorneys Chosen for the 2025 LEGAL ELITE List
Area Attorneys Chosen for the 2025 SUPER LAWYERS List
Law Firm, Others Tackle Trafficking
