There are many areas where ChatGPT can be useful, but it may not be the best choice for the court. Some lawyers in the US have been sued for relying on the technology. This case is very interesting and demonstrates the weaknesses of artificial intelligence, highlighting the need for careful research before we depend on AI search results.
See also: NASA is creating a ChatGPT-like assistant for astronauts
The fine is said to be $5,000 and will be distributed to various parties involved in the case. Attorney Steven Schwartz , who handled the case, used artificial intelligence technology for the trial. Specifically, he had ChatGPT take over important aspects of the case and use what it told him in court against the defendant. But there were serious errors.
It was found that Steven Schwartz’s report was false, but only the court could come to this conclusion, while ChatGPT could not understand it due to the fact that it is an artificial intelligent system. This finding suggests that Steven Schwartz presented a case with false reports before the court and for this he was fined. But how did the lawyer use ChatGPT in the trial and what exactly went wrong?
The lawyer for a man suing Colombian airline Avianca, Steven Schwartz, was called upon by his client to support his claims. Steven used ChatGPT to seek help with similar cases to be better prepared for the case.
See also: Infostealer malware has stolen 101,000 ChatGPT accounts
However, it turned out to be a bad decision that could have been avoided if ChatGPT’s search results had been checked. As we all know, AI models tend to spout information out of thin air when they can’t find a logical answer to give. The New York lawyer is now facing charges for not knowing that AI models are “manipulative” in nature.
Steven obtained information about fake court cases from ChatGPT that were similar to the ones he would face in court. Unaware that the information was incorrect, he used it in court as old cases. However, the court investigated his work and found that the cases “Martinez v. Delta Airlines” and “Miller v. United Airlines” did not exist.
See also: ChatGPT: Can generate genuine keys for Windows 11 for free
The court fined Steven Schwartz and associates shortly after finding out what had happened. The court acknowledged that AI can provide legal advice, but the information needs to be verified before it can be used. AI certainly plays a vital role in many industries, but caution in its use.
