A2J Tech in the US: #LSCITC Part I — from law-tech-a2j.org by Roger Smith

Excerpt:

Get to my age and you develop a pretty high intolerance level for conferences – online or off. You get more intolerant; more arrogant about what you think you know already; more easily bored; more demanding of content, presentation and presenters. But I  am a longtime fan of the Legal Services Corporation’s annual technology conference as the best I attend in a year, see an example from 2019.  And this year’s event, currently half completed, is no exception. This is consistently a premiere event. As delegates, we have done two online days with two more to come later this week. It may be far too soon to evaluate themes but early enough to highlight some of the more striking content.

Also see:

Check out this year's ABA Tech Show

 

Isaiah 1:17

Learn to do right; seek justice.
    Defend the oppressed.
Take up the cause of the fatherless;
    plead the case of the widow.

From DSC:
This verse especially caught my eye as we have severe access to justice issues here in the United States.

 

A Move for ‘Algorithmic Reparation’ Calls for Racial Justice in AI — from wired.com by Khari Johnson
Researchers are encouraging those who work in AI to explicitly consider racism, gender, and other structural inequalities.

Excerpt:

FORMS OF AUTOMATION such as artificial intelligence increasingly inform decisions about who gets hired, is arrested, or receives health care. Examples from around the world articulate that the technology can be used to exclude, control, or oppress people and reinforce historic systems of inequality that predate AI.

“Algorithms are animated by data, data comes from people, people make up society, and society is unequal,” the paper reads. “Algorithms thus arc towards existing patterns of power and privilege, marginalization, and disadvantage.

 

California Lawmakers Ignore Data in Calls to Restrict the Expansion of Legal Services — from iaals.du.edu

Excerpt:

Earlier this week, two California lawmakers spoke up about these issues. Cheryl Miller, writing for Law.com’s The Recorder, reports: “The chairs of California’s two legislative judiciary committees this week accused the state bar of ‘divert[ing] its attention from its core mission of protecting the public’ by pursuing proposals to allow nonlawyers to offer a limited range of legal services.”

California Supreme Court Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye called the criticism “not surprising,” and we would agree. After all, it is the same message we’ve heard time and again from opponents to any real, impactful change within the legal profession. And the assumptions underlying that message have been discredited by our organization and many other scholars, researchers, and even regulators in other countries. So it is frustrating just how widespread and misleading opponent claims can be.

 

 

 

From DSC:
The following items are from a recent presentation by Zach Abramowitz entitledLegal Disruption: Key Trends to Watch in 2022.” By the way, you can sign up for Zach’s legal newsletter at zachabramowitz.substack.com/


Marble Law

 

Darrow raises $20 million to uncover corporate legal violations and bring justice to all — from calcalistech.com by Meir Orbach
The Israeli startup is focused on locating violations that have caused damage to millions of people on average – the threshold for a potential class-action lawsuit

Excerpt:

Darrow has developed a machine learning-based platform which discovers legal violations by some of the biggest corporations in the world. Operating chiefly in the U.S., the company is focused on locating violations that have caused damage to millions of people on average – the threshold for a potential class-action lawsuit.

 

TermScout

Term Scout

 

 

Michigan Chief Justice Bridget Mary McCormack on the Transformative Possibilities of this Moment — from law.upenn.edu with Michigan Chief Justice Bridget Mary McCormack

Excerpt:

Bridget Mary McCormack is Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court and is a leading voice on modernizing court systems to expand access to justice and deepen public confidence in legal systems.

On this episode, she joins us to share her thoughts on how courts can learn from the experiences COVID-19 has created to better serve the public in a post-pandemic world. She also shares her views on how regulatory reform can transform legal services and why improving legal systems matters for the entire American experiment.


Addendum on 12/13/21:
Ontario Court Lays Down the Law on Technology Competence and Video Proceedings — from legaltechmonitor.com by Bob Ambrogi

An Ontario judge has laid down the law on technology competence, ruling in no uncertain terms that every lawyer has a duty to keep pace with changing technology, and that a lawyer’s discomfort with new technologies — in this case, video depositions — is no excuse for reverting to pre-pandemic methods.

 

2022 Predictions – The Market View: Part 1 — from artificiallawyer.com

Excerpt:

What do people want to see happen in 2022? And what do they think will really take place next year? These were the two questions Artificial Lawyer asked a range of legal tech experts from across the market. The quality of responses was so good, and the views expressed so detailed, that this year the 2022 Predictions will be published in two instalments.

Here we go…

We would like to see states across the U.S. tear down regulatory barriers to innovation in legal services. We would like to see human-centred design thinking at the heart of every product, process, and service. We would like to see our community – from law schools to tech companies – advance the cause of access to justice.

 
 

EPISODE 91: THE INNOVATION4JUSTICE LAB – CREATING CHANGE THROUGH LEGAL EDUCATION AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATION — from https://www.cli.collaw.com/

We often think about legal innovation and legal education as being separate and distinct but, what if they weren’t? What if students, not just law students, could pursue their passion for change in a way that led to more people, in more places, having access to justice?

That’s the question that the Innovation4Justice (I4J) Lab asked and is answering today.

 

“Bloomberg Law 2022” Releases Today – Explores Future of Legal Industry and Practice Trends — from legaltechmonitor.com by Jean O’Grady

Excerpt:

BLOOMBERG LAW 2022 SERIES EXPLORES KEY LEGAL TRENDS THAT WILL SHAPE THE YEAR TO COME
Arlington, Va. (November 1, 2021) — Bloomberg Law today announced the availability of its Bloomberg Law 2022 series, its exploration of key issues across four major topic areas – Litigation, Transactions & Contracts, Regulatory & Compliance, and The Future of the Legal Industry – that will shape the legal market in the coming year. The full series, which is issued annually and features 25 articles from Bloomberg Law’s team of legal analysts, is available on a complimentary basis at http://onb-law.com/tXw850GAeS4.

Topic area coverage includes:

  • Litigation: Developments that will shape the course of litigation in 2022 are examined, ranging from Covid-related employment and contractual issues to emerging trends in antitrust cases and bankruptcy filings.
  • Regulatory & Compliance: Learn how a heightened enforcement environment will impact everything from return-to-office mandates to privacy and tech industry regulation to potential actions by the SEC and Congress on cryptocurrency.
  • Transactions & Contracts: Take a look at the forces shaping the transactional landscape and key markets of interest, from trends in M&A and IPOs to the nuanced impacts of new data security laws on contract language.
  • The Future of the Legal Industry: Hot topics such as diversity & inclusion and attorney well-being and the rapidly expanding areas of law such as legal operations and litigation finance are analyzed.

Also see:

Moving forward, the pandemic will have lasting implications for our justice system. The immediate focus on keeping the doors of justice open will inevitably shift to growing case backlogs, reduced funding, increased demand for low-cost legal assistance, inequities in access, and deepening concerns regarding public trust and confidence. Our justice system must be ready, but how do we create paths forward to achieve justice for all?

 
 

Americans Need a Bill of Rights for an AI-Powered World — from wired.com by Eric Lander & Alondra Nelson
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is developing principles to guard against powerful technologies—with input from the public.

Excerpt (emphasis DSC):

Soon after ratifying our Constitution, Americans adopted a Bill of Rights to guard against the powerful government we had just created—enumerating guarantees such as freedom of expression and assembly, rights to due process and fair trials, and protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Throughout our history we have had to reinterpret, reaffirm, and periodically expand these rights. In the 21st century, we need a “bill of rights” to guard against the powerful technologies we have created.

Our country should clarify the rights and freedoms we expect data-driven technologies to respect. What exactly those are will require discussion, but here are some possibilities: your right to know when and how AI is influencing a decision that affects your civil rights and civil liberties; your freedom from being subjected to AI that hasn’t been carefully audited to ensure that it’s accurate, unbiased, and has been trained on sufficiently representative data sets; your freedom from pervasive or discriminatory surveillance and monitoring in your home, community, and workplace; and your right to meaningful recourse if the use of an algorithm harms you. 

In the coming months, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (which we lead) will be developing such a bill of rights, working with partners and experts across the federal government, in academia, civil society, the private sector, and communities all over the country.

Technology can only work for everyone if everyone is included, so we want to hear from and engage with everyone. You can email us directly at ai-equity@ostp.eop.gov

 

Legal Technology: Why the Legal Tech Boom is Just Getting Started — from nasdaq.com by Casey Flaherty and Jae Um of LexFusion; with thanks to Gabe Teninbaum for this resource via his Lawtomatic Newsletter, Issue #136

Excerpt:

In quick succession, legal technology finally saw its first IPOs:

With private money pouring into legal tech startups and based on our own conversations inside the industry, we at LexFusion expect more IPOs on the horizon. Thus, a primer on legal tech as a category to watch. This Part I summarizes the legal market fundamentals driving unprecedented investment in enabling tech—much of which extends beyond the boundaries implied by “legal” as a descriptor.

A pivot point appears to be upon us. Considered unthinkable a decade ago, US states and Canadian provinces—following similar reforms in the UK and Australia that have resulted in the first publicly traded law firms—are rapidly creating regulatory sandboxes to expand current rules limiting (a) who can provide legal services and (b) who can own those businesses.

From DSC:
One can see why #AI will become key. “…the projected CAGR for global data volumes is 26%—to pt where ‘the amount of data created over the next three years will be more than the data created over the past 30 years.’ This data explosion complicates even standard legal matters.”

Gabe also mentioned the following Tweet, which is relevant for this posting:

 
 

The Disruption Of Legal Services Is Here — from forbes.com by John Arsneault

Excerpt:

For the first time in those 12 years, I am now convinced we are on the precipice of the promised disruption in legal. Not because anyone in the law firms are driving toward this — but because venture capital and tech innovators have finally turned their attention to the industry.

Legal services are a much smaller overall market than, say, retail, financial services or biotech. In the world of disruption and the promised gold rush for the companies that do the disrupting, size matters. Legal has just been low on the industry list. Its number is now up.

It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback that industry now. Easy to see how big of a threat Amazon was to those companies. But when you are being rewarded for doing what you have always done and what your predecessors always did, it’s easy to miss what is around the bend. By the time those companies’ executives realized Amazon was a direct competitor with a much better fulfillment model, it was too late.

 
© 2022 | Daniel Christian