The Power of Perspectives

The Canadian Bar Association

Yves Faguy

Q&A

Andrew Arruda’s big bet on AI

By Yves Faguy March 15, 2017 15 March 2017

Andrew Arruda’s big bet on AI

 

CBA National caught up with Andrew Arruda, one of the co-founders and CEO of ROSS Intelligence, the artificial intelligence-based legal research platform. Yves Faguy asked about the hype surrounding AI, what it means for law firm hiring and what legal organizations should do about it.

CBA National: So, is artificial intelligence being overhyped in the legal marketplace?

Andrew Arruda: As with most new technologies, oftentimes people overestimate where it is today and underestimate where it is going tomorrow. When you interact with an AI system, what typically occurs is that humans want it to be able to do every single thing a human can. And that’s because they grow up watching sci-fi, etc. But that’s just not where we are with AI today. It’s not going to be able to go into court and argue a matter for you, and I don’t know if it ever will. But it’s already adding a ton of value. We see it in legal research, finding better results. You see companies who have brought it into the diligence space – it offers a lot of efficiencies there. Really when you start moving lawyers away from information retrieval so that they’re not doing that, they focus in on high impact work, advising clients, and that speeds 
up their learning curve.

Read More
Trade

When the U.S. turns its back on Pacific trade

By Yves Faguy March 14, 2017 14 March 2017

 

 

Adam Behsudi reports on the trade fallout from the U.S. dumping the TPP:

Competitors say they have no choice but to take the money U.S. businesses would have earned otherwise.

“We are not trying to take market share from the U.S. It’s more like you are putting money on the table and pushing it towards us,” said Carlo Dade, director of trade and investment policy for the Canada West Foundation, a Calgary-based think tank.

Carlos Dade (featured in the video above) has an interesting primer where he ranks the possibilities for the other TPP prospects, including Canada:

Without the TPP, Canada does better defensively in not having to worry about competitors gaining access to the U.S. market. But it does worse offensively in having the poorest access to Asian markets of any country on the Americas’ Pacific coast. This makes Canadian attempts to diversify away from its dependence on the U.S. market more difficult.

Canada also appears to stand to gain the most from the TPP going ahead without the U.S. as its companies, but not American firms across the border, will have preferential access to the new bloc. This could create a powerful incentive for firm relocation. Mexico will receive a similar but potentially smaller boost as it lacks Canada’s English language operating environment for service firms.

All of this could be viewed offensively, in both senses of the word, by the Trump administration.

Read More
Justice

Social media and the Rule of Law

By Yves Faguy February 28, 2017 28 February 2017

 

We have often discussed in this space the impact of social media and misinformation on public confidence in our justice system, and the need to adapt how we educate the public about the law.  Mark A. Cohen describes how he views the challenge:

Snippets of human interaction are captured on a smart phone or other device and go viral in minutes. This creates an instant, powerful, quickly scalable, and often biased court of public opinion. Social media is unfettered by rules of evidence that weigh credibility, materiality, and prejudicial impact. Social media is wildly popular because it is accessible, fast, unfiltered, and largely devoid of rules—the antithesis of the deliberate-often snail like pace of the judicial process. Social media has become a people’s court, shaping public opinion by providing a snapshot rather than a montage of human interaction and lacking truth filters. Social media also can serve as a global bullhorn for ‘leaks,’ misinformation, and propaganda. There are no easy fixes. Technologists, social scientists, media experts, legislators, and lawyers—among others– must create inter-disciplinary guardrails for social media to insure—among other things—that it does not subvert the judicial process. Social media is a new frontier in establishing appropriate boundaries for free speech as well as ensuring that the court of public opinion does not eclipse the judicial process as the arbiter of the social contract.

Read More
Privacy

Why searching phones at the border might violate privacy rights

By Yves Faguy February 23, 2017 23 February 2017

 

Steven Penney of the University of Alberta has a topical paper out in which he argues that customs searches, without suspicion, of digital data are unreasonable under section 8 of the Canadian Charter. Specifically, he pushes back against the notion upheld by our courts that seizing electronic devices at the border, and demanding to access them with passwords, is justified by border security interests.

It has become a cliché to say that the law struggles to keep up with technological change. Both police and privacy advocates claim that digitization has put them at a disadvantage. For the most part, however, courts have done a credible job in adapting criminal procedure doctrine both to account for the unique qualities of digital data and networks and to preserve consensus accommodations between privacy and law enforcement.

Digital customs searches have so far been an exception to this. Reflexive adherence to precedent has led courts to discount the intrusiveness of digital searches and inflate the harms of digital contraband. At customs, searches of digital containers are much more intrusive than searches of physical ones. And they do almost nothing to stop, deter, or regulate the flow of harmful data into Canada. Instead they have become an adjunct to non-border criminal law enforcement, unjustifiably exempt from the civil liberties protections applying in that realm.
 

 

Read More
Legal marketplace

Re-regulating of the legal industry, Cont'd

By Yves Faguy February 23, 2017 23 February 2017

 

On the topic of re-regulation of the legal profession, Kenneth Grady writes that complaining about the slow pace of reform is a "red herring":

We have what we need to fix the lack of access to civil justice problem. Changing the regulations may make a few things easier and transaction costs could drop. But, the problems we need to solve are independent of the regulatory structure. The barrier to solving the problems is lawyer resistance to change. Fix that problem and changing the regulations will become a side show at best.

Consider this one example. Solo practitioners argue they have a technological disadvantage. The cost of emerging software is beyond their grasp, either in time to implement or money. The professional responsibility rules prohibit law firms from having owners without law licenses. If we re-regulate, the argument goes, these firms can get access to money and resources through new owners. They can use those investments to bridge the technology gap. We already have a solution. Create a technology business (incorporation costs are trivial). Get investments in the second business which acts as a services business to the law firm. Spread the technology firm’s costs across several small firms. This model, or variations of it, exists.

Read More