The rise of AI writing tools has swept over the globe, generating incredible results across a range of fields – in equal amount to the criticism and concern it has garnered in many areas. Irrespective of an individual's opinion on the ethics of AI use, the availability of AI writing tools is growing at an increasing rate. But what does this mean for the legal industry?
Anyone with an internet connection can now use a variety of programs to generate content from school essays to fantasy novels to renaissance paintings of their dog. And despite their importance in an individual's life, legal documents are no exception to this.
Recent experiences in the Litigation Department at Duncan Lewis have shown a concerning amount of clients enquiring about contract disputes; when reviewing the documents involved, these clients – often the defendants to a potential claim – will admit that the contract upon which their case revolves was generated using AI software. Whether through a free program found online or using expensive professional software. The client will have entered a variety of criteria into an AI writing tool, which has then generated a lengthy document which the client will have, in turn, provided to the other party to sign. The contract will contain vague terms which, when written in pseudo-legal ‘jargon', may sounds robust to a layman. Such contracts will most often than not will be interpreted in a way that.
The temptation to use AI programs to generate a contract is easy to understand. With a large array of AI writing tools available for free, being able to simply enter their criteria and have a result generated in minutes will appeal to individuals and businesses alike. In the short term, this saves time and money which would otherwise be spent on employing a solicitor or other legal draftsman.
But the dangers remain when a contract is not drafted or checked by a legal professional. The Courts have never been eager to interfere with a signed contract between consenting parties, so long as the contract itself is legally sound. An AI generated contract based on unlawful terms or vague clauses opens up opportunities for litigation, particularly in favour to the party who did not ‘draft' the contract. It is no secret that litigation of any kind is expensive; the potential costs of defending a contract dispute claim far out way the cost of employing a legal professional to draft a contract. Ensuring you have a legally robust contract in any transaction will save time and money as it can significantly reduce the possibility of litigation in the future.
The Supreme Court recently ruled in Thaler (Appellant) v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Respondent) [2023] UKSC 49 that an AI cannot be an ‘inventor' under UK patent law. It was held that an AI cannot be the owner of, nor be transferred, such rights under UK law, upholding the opinions of the lower Courts. While AI's interaction with the law is still in its infancy and further rulings are no doubt to come, this precedent assumes that the parties to an AI generated contract will not be able to place blame upon the generator when the terms do not hold up.
Ultimately, it is the client's choice as to whether they choose the convenience of AI writing tools or traditional legal professionals to write their contracts. It is important to compare the two, however, and be aware of the potential pitfalls that can arise further down the line when incorporating AI content into a client's business transactions. At this stage, it is clear that AI will play an important role as it develops further in the future but it is equally clear that it is certainly not the end of lawyers.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.