Dear reader,

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been the shiny object in the legal space for the past 12 months. 

Software providers have released products that assist with legal research, draft briefs, analyze contracts, and make coding and privilege decisions during document review. Stats fly around saying 40% of an attorney's role will be replaced by Generative AI.

As usually happens, reality won't match the hype.

Forms of AI have been used in eDiscovery since the late 2000s, including concept clustering, sentiment analysis, image labeling, and more.

Technology landscape aside, you hire outside counsel to defend your economic interests, and those attorneys have ethical duties to understand intimate details of cases and supervise any cast of supporting characters, like eDiscovery providers. Much of the software those providers use feels like a "black box" and because litigators aren't confident they can explain what's going on inside that box, these tools do not see widescale adoption. 

I understand those concerns. In addition to founding an eDiscovery company, I have been a litigator for 15 years. I'm a trained skeptic. This document is for my fellow skeptics who are both curious and hesitant about using AI in document review. 

Read my "Section for the Skeptics" that addresses the top 4 concerns about CAL and Generative AI in document review. Or download a full copy of the eBook here.