Lawyers doubtful about US judiciary's draft rule for AI-generated evidence
Corporate and class-action lawyers express skepticism about a proposed US judicial rule regulating AI-generated evidence, deeming it premature.Summary
A federal judicial panel's draft proposal to regulate AI-generated evidence in trials has received criticism from corporate and class-action lawyers. The lawyers argue the rule is a premature attempt to address an evolving technology, suggesting it may not be necessary at this time, as existing rules already cover expert testimony. Thomas Allman, former general counsel of BASF Corp., stated that courts are currently managing the issue effectively without specific AI rules. The proposed rule would apply reliability standards similar to those for human expert witnesses to AI-generated evidence presented without an expert, but some, like Robert Levy of Exxon Mobil, have raised concerns about ambiguities within the draft. While acknowledging the judiciary’s proactive approach, many believe the technology’s impact on legal proceedings is still developing and a rule may be unnecessary or require further refinement.
(Source：Reuters)