ChatGPT: Is it Skynet or a Friendly Helper? A Legal Exercise...

As I educate myself on the functionalities of artificial intelligence ("A.I.") in the workplace, I have been reading a lot about how the parts of A.I. known as "machine learning" and even "deep learning" are advancing in their capabilities at an exponentially, rapid rate. For those of us who grew up watching the Terminator movies, the notion that humans could be outsmarted and destroyed by robots is a nagging little fear that we always push to the back of our minds. The tech people are telling us that we must regulate the technologies now or else...Are we really at that stage where we have to worry about such things?

Yes, in some areas we are and lawyers who understand how A.I. works need to be a part of the regulatory process. For example, we know that A.I. can be used to generate "deep fakes," which are A.I.-generated elements of humanity (i.e., voices, appearances, etc.) being simulated in such a way via graphic media (audio/video) that it's hard to discern between a real person's voice or image and an A.I.-generated fake. We should expect malignant users of A.I. to incorporate such strategies in trying to influence elections, stock prices, etc. How to regulate such malicious use is the subject of a different article.

Appreciating that A.I. is advancing rapidly and being deployed across the industry spectrum, I have been immersing myself in its capabilities. Having attended various webinars and read multiple articles on its capabilities and distinctions, I am mindful that many professions are concerned that A.I. will replace humans. Along those lines, I have begun testing (not relying upon) the depth and breadth of certain bots, including ChatGPT which has been in the news a lot lately. What is its knowledge-base and its ability to create work product? What are ChatGPT's strengths and weaknesses; and how can they can be effectively used and managed?

In testing the A.I., I wanted to see what its current 'understanding' was with respect to a simple, but fundamental legal question, but in a niche area of the law -- and what area of the law isn't niche anymore, regardless of the size of the practice? Law, like many other professions, is so specialized anymore that a basic understanding of certain fundamentals isn't even enough to provide employment. With this in mind, and given that I am the former chairwoman of a large firm's statewide Equine Law Practice Group, I asked ChatGPT a basic question that every equine lawyer (in Florida) should know by heart: Under Florida law, what are the requirements for an equine bill of sale?

ChatGPT's response is copied below:

*****

"I am not a lawyer, but I can provide you with some general information about equine bills of sale in Florida. It's important to note that laws can change, so it's always a good idea to consult with a qualified legal professional or refer to the relevant statutes to ensure accuracy and compliance. With that said, here are some general considerations for an equine bill of sale in Florida:

1. Identification: The bill of sale should include the identification details of the horse, such as its name, breed, color, age, markings, and any registration or identification numbers if applicable.
2. Parties Involved: The bill of sale should clearly state the names, addresses, and contact information of both the seller (current owner) and the buyer (new owner).
3. Purchase Price and Payment Terms: The agreed-upon purchase price should be clearly stated in the bill of sale, along with any specific terms related to the payment, such as the method of payment and whether it's a lump sum or installment payments.
4. Representations and Warranties: The bill of sale may include statements about the horse's condition, health, soundness, or any warranties made by the seller. It's important to be accurate and truthful in these representations.
5. Release of Liability: Depending on the circumstances, the bill of sale may include a clause releasing the seller from any liability or claims related to the horse after the sale is completed. This clause may vary depending on the specific agreement between the parties.
6. Signatures and Date: The bill of sale should be signed and dated by both the seller and the buyer. It's recommended to have the signatures notarized to add an extra layer of authenticity.

Remember that this is just a general overview, and there may be additional requirements or considerations depending on the specific circumstances. If you are involved in an equine transaction, it's always advisable to consult with an attorney familiar with Florida equine law to ensure that your bill of sale meets all the necessary legal requirements."

*****

I was impressed by the ease at which ChatGPT was able to generate in an organized fashion many of the basic elements required to be in an equine bill of sale under state law. However, for equine lawyers, we immediately were able to identify those elements that ChatGPT omitted from its answer that are mandated under Florida Administrative Code 5H-26.004. Most critically, ChatGPT omitted from its answer the required statement regarding whether sales agents were involved with the transaction; and the statements as to the legal authority of the persons signing the bill of sale.

On a different topic, I also asked ChatGPT what the basic disclosure requirements were for companies traded on the New York Stock Exchange. ChatGPT answered the question efficiently by listing most (but not all) of the SEC forms that had to be routinely submitted and a brief summary describing the purpose of each form, while qualifying its answer that its knowledge base was current only through 2021 and that one should check the current SEC requirements.

One can easily see how A.I. will be able to expedite basic, legal writing projects. Ultimately, however, attorneys must supervise the work product being generated by A.I. just as one would in supervising a junior attorney under ABA Model Rule 5.1 ("Responsibilities of Partner or Supervisory Lawyer"). ChatGPT simply is not an attorney and it lacks the depth of knowledge that an experienced lawyer has.

In building my own foundational knowledge of how A.I. can be used, I've been testing ChatGPT's knowledge-base rather than its ability to generate novel legal arguments and prepare briefs or unique contracts. That will be another exercise. Nevertheless, given how quickly ChatGPT can create some basic, accurate, but incomplete drafts (at least on a few subjects), it can be used as a starting point for some work product. I would encourage everyone to learn how to use these "bots" in their own line of work. ChatGPT is a tool that can improve workplace efficiencies, but it has yet to reach the sophistication to replace the analysis required of lawyers.

Certainly in those areas that don't implicate national security threats, ChatGPT does not pose a current threat of taking over the professions. It certainly is not Skynet. Nevertheless, we should all learn what these forms of A.I. can and cannot do for us in our respective areas. Large corporate legal departments are already using them to generate form contracts and prepare basic briefs. As General Counsel to a company and as one who oversees a large book of outside business, I would hope that law firms that work by the billable hour will incorporate some of these A.I.-generated efficiencies for the benefit of their clients. I know I will be for those projects we keep in-house.