 |
The Tech Savvy LawyerAuthor: Michael D.J. Eisenberg
The Tech Savvy Lawyer interviews Judges, Lawyers, and other professionals discussing utilizing technology in the practice of law. It may springboard an idea and help you in your own pursuit of the business we call "practicing law". Please join us for interesting conversations enjoyable at any tech skill level! Language: en Genres: News, Tech News, Technology Contact email: Get it Feed URL: Get it iTunes ID: Get it |
Listen Now...
TSL Labs 🧪 Initiative: Attorney-Client Privilege vs. Public AI: The Hoeppner Decision Lawyers Need to Understand in 2026 ⚖️🤖
Friday, 27 February, 2026
Join us for an AI-powered deep dive into the ethical challenges facing legal professionals in the age of generative AI. 🤖 We unpack the February 23, 2026, editorial AI may not be your co‑counsel—and a recent SDNY decision just made that painfully clear. ⚖️🤖. Our Google Notebook LLM hostsbreaks down why a single click on a public AI tool's Terms of Use can trigger a privilege waiver, and what "tech competence" really means in 2026—especially after United States v. Hoeppner and Judge Jed Rakoff's wake-up-call analysis of confidentiality and third-party disclosure risk. 🔗 Read the full editorial on The Tech-Savvy Lawyer.Page and share this episode with a colleague who is experimenting with AI in client matters. In our conversation, we cover the following 00:00 — The "superhuman assistant" promise, and the procedural nightmare risk. 🧠⚖️ 00:01 — The core warning: AI use can "blow a hole" in privilege. 00:02 — Editorial overview: "The AI Privilege Trap" by Michael D.J. Eisenberg. 00:02 — The case: United States v. Hoeppner (SDNY) and why it matters. 00:03 — Why Judge Jed Rakoff's opinion gets attention (tech-literate, influential). 00:03 — The facts: defendant drafts with a public AI tool, then sends outputs to counsel. 00:04 — The court's conclusion: no attorney-client privilege, no work product protection. 00:05 — Privilege basics applied to AI: "confidential + lawyer" and why AI fails that test. 00:06 — The Terms-of-Use problem: inputs/outputs may be collected and shared. 🧾 00:07 — The "stranger on the street" analogy: you can't retroactively make it confidential. 00:08 — PII and client facts: why pasting sensitive data into public AI is high-risk. 00:08 — ABA Model Rule 1.1: competence includes understanding tech risks. 00:09 — ABA Model Rule 1.6: confidentiality and waiver risk with public AI. 00:10 — "Reasonable safeguards": read policies, adjust settings, and know training/logging. 00:11 — Public vs. enterprise AI: why contracts and "walled gardens" matter. 00:11 — Legal research AI examples discussed: Lexis/Westlaw-style AI offerings. 00:12 — ABA Model Rules 5.1 & 5.3: supervise AI like a nonlawyer assistant/vendor. 00:13 — Redefining "tech-savvy lawyer" in 2026: judgment and restraint. 🧭 00:14 — The "straight-face test": could you defend confidentiality after a judge reads the policy? 00:15 — Client-side risk: clients can sabotage privilege before contacting counsel. 00:16 — Practical takeaway: check settings, read the fine print, keep true secrets offline (for now). 🔒 RESOURCES Mentioned in the episode ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct (Rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 5.1, 5.3) Software & Cloud Services mentioned in the conversation Lexis (Lexis+ AI category mentioned) — https://www.lexisnexis.com/ Microsoft Word — https://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-365/word Public generative AI "chatbot" tools (general category) — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatbot Westlaw (Westlaw AI category mentioned) — https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/en/products/westlaw
