It was a story that could have come from the pages of a science fiction book – an artificial intelligence (AI) robot scheduled to argue in court against a human advocate. What seemed like it would become a milestone moment for technology quickly began to unravel when the opposing counsel issued jail threats due to alleged AI misconduct. As news of this strange event traveled around the globe, many began questioning if and how robots should be used in legal proceedings. With so many unanswered questions, let’s dive into what happened and explore what this could mean for the future of robotic interaction in courts worldwide.
How Jail Threats Canceled The Robot Court Argument: An Overview
The British man who had intended to utilize a “robot lawyer” to aid a defendant in challenging a traffic ticket has decided against moving forward after receiving warnings of potential prosecution and imprisonment.
Joshua Browder, the head of a New York-based firm called DoNotPay, has found a solution that allows people who want to challenge their traffic tickets in court to use arguments based on artificial intelligence.
Here’s How It Was Supposed To Work – A Guide
The person challenging a speeding ticket would wear smart glasses that record court proceedings and dictate responses from a small speaker into the defendant’s ear. The system relied on a few leading AI text generators, including ChatGPT and DaVinci.
The initial plan of having the inaugural AI-driven legal defense in California on 22nd February must be abandoned.
As news spread, state bar officials were filled with unease, Browder reports. He states that numerous angry letters were sent in response.
Joshua Browder says:
“Multiple state bars have threatened us,”
“One even said a referral to the district attorney’s office and prosecution and prison time would be possible.”
Browder reported that a state bar official made it known that in some states, engaging in the illegal practice of law is considered a misdemeanor punishable with imprisonment for up to six months in county jail.
Joshua Browder continues to say:
“Even if it wouldn’t happen, the threat of criminal charges was enough to give it up.” “The letters have become so frequent that we thought it was just a distraction and that we should move on.”
By licensing and regulating attorneys, bar associations ensure that those who hire lawyers receive services from individuals knowledgeable in the law.
Browder declined to name which state bar specifically sent the letters or who made the threat of possible prosecution but confirmed that his startup, DoNotPay, is being looked into by several state bars, including California’s.
George Cardona, Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar of California, refused to address the inquiry concerning DoNotPay in a statement but did say that it is their responsibility to look into any possible occurrences of unlawful legal practice.
Cardona went on to say:
“We regularly let potential violators know that they could face prosecution in civil or criminal court, which is entirely up to law enforcement,”
NPR reported that Leah Wilson, the Executive Director of the State Bar of California, declared that technology-driven legal representation has recently developed to address the scarcity of inexpensive legal counsel.
Leah Wilson says:
“In 2023, we are seeing well-funded, unregulated providers rushing into the market for low-cost legal representation, raising questions again about whether and how these services should be regulated,”
Even though there is no current challenge to using AI in court, some experts have questioned how effective DoNotPay’s AI tools would be for individuals who require legal services. Many users have experienced different results when utilizing its basic features, from average to unsatisfactory.
Browder has made a name for himself by utilizing dramatic tactics. Just recently, he tweeted that the organization would pay one million dollars to any lawyer standing in front of the Supreme Court wearing AirPods and using AI-generated statements from its “robot lawyer” as part of the argument.
DoNotPay, a company launched in 2015, has secured an impressive $28 million of funding, including investments from well-known venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. According to research analyst PitchBook, the total amount raised by DoNotPay is now at its highest level ever.
How To Safely Pivot Away From AI Legal Defense Due To Threats
Browder stated that instead of using AI to assist people charged with traffic offenses, DoNotPay would concentrate on providing aid for individuals confronting costly medical bills, unrequired subscriptions, and troubles with credit bureaus.
Browder still hopes AI in the courtroom has yet to reach its final destination.
Browder went on to say:
“The truth is, most people can’t afford lawyers.”
This could’ve shifted the balance and allowed people to use tools like ChatGPT in the courtroom that could’ve helped them win cases.
The future of robot lawyers is shrouded in doubt due to another much more straightforward issue than the philosophical musings of bar officials; courtroom protocols. These regulations and rules can be difficult for artificial intelligence systems to navigate, thus casting doubts on using robotic attorneys in legal proceedings.
In federal courts, audio recordings of legal proceedings are not allowed; this practice is also prohibited in some state courts. Despite this, DoNotPay has created AI tools that necessitate capturing sound from arguments for their machine-learning algorithm to work. These tools have yet to be tested in a court of law.
Browder continues to say:
“I think calling the tool a ‘robot lawyer’ really riled a lot of lawyers up.”
“But I think they’re missing the forest for the trees. Technology is advancing and courtroom rules are very outdated.”
The incident raises questions about the role of robots in society and how they might be used in the future. Do we need to start preparing for a world where robots can take on more human roles? What are the ethical implications of using robots in this way? These are all questions that need to be considered going forward.
Source: NPR
