[E-trademarks] Reviewing ChatGPT Documents
Carl Oppedahl
carl at oppedahl.com
Mon Dec 11 19:22:35 EST 2023
Yeah it has not yet happened to me (so far as I know) but surely it is
only a matter of time before every practitioner will have faced this.
I cringe to think of the risks.
If I draft something myself, then likely as not I will usually think
through what needs to be in the document. Maybe I might completely
forget some important bit that ought to have been in the document, but
I'd guess I would not screw up in that way very often. Not only that,
if I take as my starting point some earlier document that I had touched
and had already checked for missing items, that reduces the risk that I
completely forget to put in a choice-of-law clause or whatever.
But when you or I get asked to review a document prepared by some other
person (or by some AI entity), its so very different, right? Yes if
there were a misspelled word it would jump off the page at you. But
that's not the kind of mistake that an AI would make. And yes if some
human or AI strings together some words that are internally
inconsistent, that can jump off the page just from reading it aloud.
But suppose the document that was prepared by somebody else (or by some
AI entity) happens to be /*completely missing*/ some item or provision.
When some item or provision is completely missing, that is not the sort
of thing that jumps off the page, at least not for me. It doesn't
actively look wrong if what we are talking about is a dog that didn't
bark (to use the Sherlock Holmes metaphor).
When I started my law firm a long time ago, one of the things I wrote on
our web site was that if the potential client wants to retain me to
review a draft document that they prepared, just to "touch it up" as
they would say, my bill for the work would likely be just as large as,
and probably bigger than, my bill if they had sucked it up and asked me
to prepare the document myself.
On 12/11/2023 4:51 PM, Scott Landsbaum via E-trademarks wrote:
> Twice now a client has asked me to review a draft document that the
> client had ChatGPT write. I find this offensive, but I'm not sure if
> I should. Have you encountered this? Are you agreeing to do it? I'm
> considering telling clients that I won't do it, although if a client
> told me they had another lawyer draft a document and wanted me to
> check it, I would. It's a wonky area and sure to happen more. Your
> thoughts?
>
> Regards,
> Scott
> Winter Closure: Dec. 25 - Jan. 1
> Scott Landsbaum, Inc.
> 323-314-7881 <tel:323-314-7881> / f 323-714-2454
> 8306 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 420, Beverly Hills, CA 90211
> www.scottlandsbaum.com <http://www.scottlandsbaum.com/> /
> www.linkedin.com/in/scottlandsbaum/
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/scottlandsbaum/>
>
> NOTICE: This e-mail is intended solely for the individual or
> individuals to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential
> attorney-client privileged information and attorney work product. If
> you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, forward,
> print, copy or distribute it or any of the information it contains.
> Please delete it immediately and notify us by return e-mail or by
> telephone at (323) 314-7881 <tel:%28323%29%20314-7881>.
>
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE:Any discussion of tax matters contained in
> this or any email (including any attachments) or in any oral or other
> written communication is not intended to be used and cannot be used
> for the purpose of avoiding U.S. tax related penalties or in
> connection with the promotion, marketing or recommendation of any of
> the matters addressed in the communication.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231211/64a761d7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4514 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231211/64a761d7/attachment.p7s>
More information about the E-trademarks
mailing list