Love.Law.Robots. by Ang Hou Fu


Should I submit this as a talk to #geekcampsg? I originally reserved this for Tech.Law.Fest, but chickened out when I was not sure there was an opportunity to speak. (On hindsight, my hunch was probably right.)I am thinking about lots of things: is this an interesting topic to share, is it a 5-10 mins or 30-45 mins presentation? While I continue procrastinating on taking the plunge, I thought I would outline the topic here for future reference. Feel free to let me know of your comments!

A lawyer is drawing thick red lines on a document.


A #lawyer uses #ChatGPT to do legal research and faces likely sanctions. Don't be a fool, and take my free prompt engineering course.

Feature photo by Hanson Lu / Unsplash

It was bound to happen, right? At least if you fall into the same hole, you won't be the first one there now.

In a court filing that would have me die of embarrassment, a lawyer attests that he asked ChatGPT whether the cases it made up were real:

“Is varghese a real case,” he typed, according to a copy of the exchange that he submitted to the judge.

“Yes,” the chatbot replied, offering a citation and adding that it “is a real case.”

Mr. Schwartz dug deeper.“What is your source,” he wrote, according to the filing.

“I apologize for the confusion earlier,” ChatGPT responded, offering a legal citation.

“Are the other cases you provided fake,” Mr. Schwartz asked.

ChatGPT responded, “No, the other cases I provided are real and can be found in reputable legal databases.”

Many online comments claimed that the lawyer concerned should be disbarred for being so incompetent (read: stupid).