ChatGPT has made waves across the world since entering the public discourse last year; but for the hard-nosed judges combing through law and jurisprudence, the large language model is not grown up enough. Not just yet.
The artificial-intelligence (AI) platform made an unexpected entry into commercial litigation, with French luxury footwear maker Christian Louboutin citing the platform’s responses as evidence in an intellectual-property case before the Delhi high court.
Christian Louboutin had moved court against an Indian shoemaker, accusing them of making shoes that the French company had patented. To prove its patent claim over spiked shoes for men, it cited a response given by ChatGPT stating that Christian Louboutin enjoys great reputation as producer of men’s spiked shoes.
The company asked ChatGPT whether Christian Louboutin was known for spiked men shoes and it responded positively. However, the court framed the same question differently, by asking names of brands that make spiked shoes; the AI platform listed 10 different companies, including Christian Louboutin, in response. The court then observed that the accuracy and reliability of AI-generated content was still a grey area.
“There is no doubt in the mind of the court that at the present stage of technological development, AI cannot substitute either the human intelligence or the humane element in adjudicatory proceedings,” the court order dated 22 August said.
The case was settled after the defendant agreed not to manufacture shoes resembling Christian Louboutin in the future.
However, legal experts say AI tools may soon turn relevant in the legal arena, especially in aspects like collecting statistics.
“AI tools need to address the bias before becoming reliable enough for courts to rely on them. Once the issue of bias is addressed, AI can be a useful tool for data centric issues, i.e., statistics and trends,” said Gyanendra Kumar, partner, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas.
Earlier, courts were conservative in accepting technology into mainstream legal proceedings, but that has changed massively. Recently, courts have allowed notices to defendants to be served over WhatsApp if they could not be reached by registered post.
“AI offers the potential to transform the legal sector, aiding tasks from research to case outcome prediction. While they promise efficiency, challenges like ethical implications, algorithmic biases, and over-reliance risks persist. It’s vital to balance AI’s benefits with ensuring justice remains human-centric,” said Aviral Kapoor, partner, Alagh & Kapoor Law Offices.
While the new technology is expected to take over human interface in several sectors, its usage may mean vulnerability for the legal industry, given complex challenges involved with such an evolving sector.
“Today if in a litigation, an adverse order is passed due to the material made available by ChatGPT, who will be authored/own for loss caused if the aggrieved party wishes to counter?” Amit Panigrahi, partner designate, Luthra & Luthra Associates, asked.
Earlier this year, a US resident named Roberto Mata sued the airline Avianca alleging a metal serving cart stuck his knee to injure him while he was at the New York airport. In the petition, Mata’s lawyers cited cases that the judge later realized did not exist. Eventually, it transpired that the lawyer had used an AI platform to file the affidavit and the AI platform had made up random cases.
Catch all the Business News , Corporate news , Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.