Plagiarism Now?

There has been plenty to concern us about Artificial Intelligence. The greatest challenge seems to remain identity. See First - What is it? (November 2024). Many people I speak with still are uncomfortable with what AI is and what it is not. That is challenging. Much of what will occur in coming years will not be AI, but will be powered by it.

Computers are not good or evil, but they empower and enable both. AI essentially makes computers faster and more efficient - people using them can do good or evil more rapidly than ever before. The choice between the two will remain with the people.

Everyone is now familiar with the hapless attorneys using AI ignorantly and lazily. They ask a large language model (LLM) to prepare a brief or memo, count on its candor and care, sign that creation, and file it with some court. They have done so ignorantly and trustingly, mistakenly and recklessly, regrettably and repeatedly. The many news stories of discipline mean no attorney can credibly express ignorance any longer.

Too often (once is "too often"), those filings turn out to be riddled with false citations and other hallucinations. To be clear AI makes up facts to suit itself. Worse, it relies primarily on the internet for its information and often cites as authoritative the font of collective conjecture called Wikipedia. You too can contribute to that melange - anyone can.

Some legal scholars are seeing other challenges ahead for lawyers. Lawyers are considered special. Some recognize the Rules of Professional Conduct acknowledge attorneys "play a unique role in serving the public interest and maintaining the integrity of the legal system."

Lawyers have responsibilities to be forthright, honest, and protective of client interest and security. They must strive for competency and professionalism, and serve the public interest.

In both professional and personal perspectives, there are opportunities for lawyers to find difficulty with the law. A non-lawyer might get some traction with "I didn't know," but that track may be more challenging for an attorney. The more an attorney proclaims their expertise, perhaps the more difficult it becomes. Sorry, but it may be easier to excuse the ignorance of a first-year lawyer than a 50-year lawyer. 

And with that predicate, we turn for a moment to an old lawyer standby - plagiarism. It has been said that "plagiarism is the highest form of flattery." Law students, all students, are cautioned about it and punished for it. I knew students in law school who found great tribulation in lifting someone else's work and calling it their own.

Nonetheless, in practice, there is a good argument that plagiarism is beyond tolerated - it "is encouraged." Some Bar Association and court decisions lend credence to excusing plagiarism or at least to forgiving unintentional copying. Despite that, there are examples noted in which lawyers have been "disciplined for plagiarizing portions of their briefs, often by copying judicial opinions without citing."

I have seen eminently qualified and prominent lawyers punished for plagiarism. The road home from that was challenging, repeatedly. Despite this chilling example, there is a sentiment in the law that plagiarism is acceptable and even laudable. Those law students threatened with discipline for it are seemingly suddenly licensed for it by bar passage.

A law review article in 2024 pointed out poignantly that AI may both enable and encourage plagiarism. The author notes that lawyers are rapidly and confidently engaging AI. And there are allegations that the AI platforms have already violated copyright. Some contend that their very existence results from gross plagiarism.

More specifically, however, the author cautions that these LLMs are capable of lifting "entire sections of copyrighted works as output." This is caused by "a well-documented phenomenon known as memorization," which essentially means that in their training these LLMs retained (copied) a great deal of what they "read." The article provides concrete examples.

Have you ever clicked on an internet headline and found yourself unable to read the page it took you to? Often we find ourselves confronted by paywalls or other impediments - the article is available only to paying subscribers. The 2024 law review says that LLMs have been able to penetrate these measures and return "whole paragraphs" of literature for review and use without subscribing.

Lawyers engaging in that practice might rethink the definition of larceny. Is it appropriate to take someone's property? Is it more appropriate when you can excuse yourself and blame a computer program?

To summarize - despite the fact that some perceive "plagiarism" as flattery, it can be actionable. Even though lawyers often copy material from forms, and the work of others, it is not right or excusable. And, there is evidence that LLMs are capable and culpable of lifting and even stealing copyrighted information.

Lawyers are held to a higher standard. They have obligations and responsibilities. As they engage the LLM for speed and ease, they should remain cognizant of the dangers of plagiarism, and more. A future post will address the other risk of civil liability for copyright infringement. 

Prior posts on AI and Robotics
Will the Postal Service be our Model for Reform? (August 2014)
Attorneys Obsolete (December 2014)
How Will Attorneys (or any of us Adapt? (April 2015)
Salim Ismail and a Life-Changing Seminar (May 2015)
The Running Man from Pensacola, Florida (July 2015)
Will Revolution be Violent (October 2015)
Ross, AI, and the new Paradigm Coming (March 2016)
Chatbot Wins (June 2016)
Robotics and Innovation Back in the News (September 2016)
Universal Income - A Reality Coming? (November 2016)
Artificial Intelligence in Our World (January 2017)
Another AI Invasion, Meritocracy? (January 2017)
Strong Back Days are History (February 2017)
Nero May be Fiddling (April 2017)
The Coming Automation (November 2017)
Tech is Changing Work (November 2018)
Hallucinating Technology (January 2019)
Inadvertently Creating Delay and Making Work (May 2019)
Artificial Intelligence Surveillance (August 2020)
Robot in the News (October 2021)
Safety is Coming (March 2022)
Metadata and Makeup (May 2022)
Long Term Solutions (June 2022)
Intelligence (November 2022)
You're Only Human (May 2023).
AI and the Latest (June 2023)
Mamma Always Said (June 2023)
AI and the Coming Regulation (September 2023)
AI Incognito (December 2023)
The Grinch (January 2024)
AI in Your Hand (April 2024)
AI and DAN (July 2024)
AI is a Tool (October 2024)
Rights for the Toaster (October 2024)
Everybody Wake Up! (October 2024)
First What is it? (November 2024)
X-Files or Poltergeist? (November 2024)
Is Gartner Helpful on AI? (December 2024)
The Eeeeyew AI Says What? (December 2024)
Is AI bad or just Scary? (December 2024)
Layers and Layers of What? (January 2025)
Wayback Machine (January 2025)

Should we Pause? (January 2025)

Plagiarism Now? (February 2025)