They are on the mark with their great title too. “Law Firm Without Lawyers Needs Lawyers”
We;; worth a read if you have a spare moment.””Non-JDs should no longer be barred from ownership of law firms, and similarly, non-JDs should not be barred from the provisioning of some legal services. In reality, this has already partially occurred through the encroachment of global consulting firms into legal services,” notes ROSS’ Andrew Arruda.”
I have been enjoying salsa (and other Latin dancing) for a number of years and one of the things that has fascinated me is the subtlety and connection in human interaction that dancers have.
Given R&D is trending in Govt reviews, here are my ten thoughts on the R&D tax incentive, by a tax lawyer (Cartland Law) and AI developer (Ailira) who claims R&D himself
Earlier this year I participated in my first MMA fight. I have been karate training for 25 years (3rd Degree Black Belt Goju Ryu) and have taken part in other martial arts (BJJ, wrestling) but this was, without a doubt, the hardest thing that I have done so far. I have also been running a tech company that builds legal artificial intelligence (Ailira) for the last 4 years, alongside my law firm, and I was struck (pun intended) by a number of similarities in the experience.
Third-year law students at the University of Southern Queensland are gaining valuable insights into the evolution of the Australian legal sector courtesy of legal tech entrepreneur Adrian Cartland and his Artificially Intelligent Legal Information Resource Assistant (AILIRA)
Ailira & Adrian Cartland Featured In Australian Lawyers Weekly Article, “Tech-savvy lawyer launches new business”
“There appears to be an acceptance that the industry is evolving but there is still a lot of confusion and uncertainty among decision-makers. I can answer the questions that software developers can’t and understand the nuances in the delivery of technology for the legal profession,” he said.
It is considered essential to algorithms that are used in law. Here is why I think that popular view is wrong – and why I generally dislike prediction algorithms anyway.
Legal AI News
A court in Shenzhen, China, has ruled that an article generated by artificial intelligence (AI) is protected by copyright, according to state news outlet China News Service, representing a notable milestone for AI’s credentials as a creative force.
Regulators are already sniffing around the lawtech scene like flies at a picnic
Interesting piece by Duane Morris in the US who write, “Machine learning is increasing exponentially. As a result, artificial intelligence (AI) now is powering many aspects of our lives. If you ask Siri or Alexa, they will tell you that AI computers are performing surgeries, flying planes, driving cars and winning at games. What’s next? What’s next might include inventions created by AI. Indeed, several months ago, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) sought public comments on this topic.”
Legal Tech Companies Need Not Seek Input of Lawyers In Product Development Says LexBlog Founder, Kevin O’Keefe
O’Keefe writes, “I’m not sure legal tech companies, when beginning or when working on new ideas and products. need to or should be seeking the input of lawyers…….I’m serious.
UK Report: Chatham House – The Royal Institute of International Affairs, “AI-driven personalization in digital media: political and societal implications”
This paper seeks to outline the implications of the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI), and more specifically of machine learning (ML), by the old ‘gatekeepers’ – the legacy media – as well as by the new, algorithmic, media – the digital intermediaries – focusing on personalization. Data-driven personalization, despite demonstrating commercial benefits for the companies that deploy it, as well as a purported convenience for consumers, can have individual and societal implications that convenience simply cannot counterbalance.
Article: Copyright, Trademark, and Artificial Intelligence – USPTO Seeking Comments Until 10 January 2020
Back in August 2019, the USPTO published a notice requesting public input on the interplay between patent law and artificial intelligence (AI). In October, the USPTO expanded its notice to extend the inquiry to include copyright, trademark, and other IP rights. The PTO has now extended that deadline for comments until January 10, 2020. 84 FR 66176.
The Times writes, “Racial discrimination by algorithms or by people is harmful — but that’s where the similarities end.”
A report by UK legal media outlet, Legal Cheek, says that “Clifford Chance has been quietly teaching all its new trainee solicitors how to produce mobile and web apps”