![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
The article examines the potential implications of ChatGPT ChatGPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer) [Alec Radford and others, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’ Amazon Web Services (2018) <https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/openai-assets/research-covers/language-unsupervised/language_understanding_paper.pdf> accessed 28 May 2024; When this article was submitted, only ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4 was available. However, during the revision stage, ChatGPT-4o (also known as GPT-4 Omnus) was introduced to the market, as announced on 13 May 2024.] in judicial decision-making process. This is especially salient given that judicial decisions are made within an interactive ritual chain (Bergman Blix) rather than an ivory tower. This cutting-edge natural language processing model leverages deep learning techniques to potentially aid judiciary members in formulating legal judgements. Therefore, this article assesses the capabilities, limitations, and potential applications of ChatGPT, aiming to evaluate the model's feasibility as a collaborative contributor to legal judgements. In particular, the article examines the utilisation of ChatGPT as an adjunctive tool, supporting human judges in their decision-making processes and, consequently, establishing to what extent artificial intelligence (AI) is used as a tool or collaborator in judicial decision-making. This determines authorship and, accordingly, ownership of judgements.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Notes
1 Mátyás Bencze and Gar Yein Ng, ‘Measuring the Unmeasurable?’ in Mátyás Bencze and Gar Yein Ng (eds), How to Measure the Quality of Judicial Reasoning (Intersentia 2018) 8.
2 Gar Yein Ng, ‘Quality of Judicial Reasoning: England and Wales’ in Mátyás Bencze and Gar Yein Ng (eds) (n 2) 103–21.
3 Richard H Fallon Jr, ‘The Statutory Interpretation Muddle’ (2019) 114 NWULR 269.
4 Lee Epstein and Keren Weinshall, The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Behavior: A Comparative Perspective (CUP, 2021) 1.
5 Ramishah Maruf, ‘Lawyer Apologizes for Fake Court Citations from ChatGPT’ CNN (New York, 28 May 2023) <https://edition.cnn.com/2023/05/27/business/chat-gpt-avianca-mata-lawyers/index.html> accessed 28 June 2023; Molly Bohannon, ‘Lawyer Used ChatGPT in Court— and Cited Fake Cases. A Judge Is Considering Sanctions’ Forbes (8 June 2023) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2023/06/08/lawyer-used-chatgpt-in-court-and-cited-fake-cases-a-judge-is-considering-sanctions/> accessed 28 June 2023; Thomas Claburn, ‘Lawyers Who Cited Fake Cases Hallucinated by ChatGPT Must Pay’ The Register (22 June 2023) <https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/22/lawyers_fake_cases/> accessed 28 June 2023; Grace Dean, ‘A Law Firm Was Fined $5,000 After One of Its Lawyers Used ChatGPT to Write a Court Brief Riddled with Fake Case References’ Business Insider (23 June 2023) <https://www.businessinsider.com/chatgpt-generative-ai-law-firm-fined-fake-cases-citations-legal-2023-6?r=US&IR=T> accessed 28 June 2023.
6 Lyle Moran, ‘Lawyer Cites Fake Cases Generated by ChatGPT in Legal Brief’ Legal Dive (30 May 2023) <https://www.legaldive.com/news/chatgpt-fake-legal-cases-generative-ai-hallucinations/651557/> accessed 16 June 2023; Sara Merken, ‘Another US judge says lawyers must disclose AI use’ Reuters (8 June 2023) <https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/another-us-judge-says-lawyers-must-disclose-ai-use-2023-06-08/> accessed 8 June 2023; Sara Merken, ‘More Judges, Lawyers Confront Pitfalls of Artificial Intelligence’ Reuters (16 June 2023) <https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/more-judges-lawyers-confront-pitfalls-artificial-intelligence-2023-06-16/> accessed 16 June 2023; Dan Milmo and Agency, ‘Two US Lawyers Fined for Submitting Fake Court Citations from ChatGPT’ The Guardian (23 June 2023) <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jun/23/two-us-lawyers-fined-submitting-fake-court-citations-chatgpt> accessed 28 June 2023.
7 Jeffery T Ulmer, ‘Criminal Courts as Inhabited Institutions: Making Sense of Difference and Similarity in Sentencing’ (2019) 48(1) Crime & Just 483; see also Stina Bergman Blix, ‘Making Independent Decisions Together: Rational Emotions in Legal Adjudication’ (2022) 45(1) Symbolic Interaction 50.
8 Ulmer (n 7) 484.
9 ibid 488.
10 Richard Susskind, Online Courts and the Future of Justice (OUP 2019) 19.
11 ibid.
12 ibid 492–3.
13 Bergman Blix (n 7) 52; see also Sharyn Roach Anleu and Kathy Mack, Judging and Emotion: A Socio-Legal Analysis (Routledge 2021).
14 Bergman Blix (n 7) 55.
15 ibid 56.
16 Ulmer (n 7) 486.
17 Bergman Blix (n 7) 57.
18 James L Gibson and Michael J Nelson, ‘The Least Accountable Branch’ (2019) 55 Court Review 30.
19 Bergman Blix (n 7) 57–8.
20 ibid 59.
21 ibid.
22 ibid.
23 ibid.
24 Epstein and Weinshall (n 4) 8–9.
25 ibid 8.
26 ibid.
27 Susskind (n 10) 273–5.
28 Allison P Harris and Maya Sen, ‘Bias and Judging’ (2019) 22 Annual Review of Political Science 241, 242.
29 Ulmer (n 7) 515.
30 ibid 495.
31 Bergman Blix (n 7) 51.
32 Gibson and Nelson (n 18) 31.
33 ibid 31; see also Ulmer (n 7) 488.
34 Gibson and Nelson (n 18) 31.
35 Ulmer (n 7) 495.
36 Susskind (n 10) 76.
37 Epstein and Weinshall (n 4) 3.
38 Gibson and Nelson (n 18) 32–35.
39 ibid 35.
40 ibid 32.
41 ibid 30; see also Ulmer (n 7) 493.
42 The Lammy Review: An Independent Review Into the Treatment of, and Outcomes for, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Individuals in the Criminal Justice System (September 2017); see also Baroness Casey of Blackstock, Baroness Casey Review: A Review into the Standards of Behaviour and Internal Culture of the Metropolitan Police Service (March 2023).
43 Harris and Sen (n 28) 246.
44 ibid 242.
45 ibid 243.
46 ibid 242.
47 ibid 243.
48 ibid 255.
49 Monidipa Fouzder, ‘Sanction for Judge who “Displayed Subconscious Bias”’ The Law Gazette (27 February 2023) <https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/sanction-for-judge-who-displayed-subconscious-bias/5115270.article> accessed 12 July 2023.
50 Council of Europe, ‘Council of Europe European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ)’ <https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej> accessed 12 July 2023.
51 EU AI Act 2024 art3(1) <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0138-FNL-COR01_EN.pdf> accessed 13 May 2024.
52 Joel Tito, ‘How AI Can Improve Access to Justice’ Centre for Public Impact (23 October 2017) <https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/case-study/how-ai-can-improve-access-to-justice/> accessed 14 July 2023; The Law Society of England and Wales, ‘AI: Artificial Intelligence and the Legal Profession - Horizon Scanning Report’ The Law Society (May 2018) <https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/research/ai-artificial-intelligence-and-the-legal-profession> accessed 14 July 2023; Pierre-Adrien Hanania, ‘AI for justice – Bringing Data into the Courtroom’ Capgemini (3 June 2021) <https://www.capgemini.com/insights/expert-perspectives/ai-for-justice-bringing-data-into-the-courtroom/#:~:text=AI%20can%20access%20more%20of,experts%20at%20predicting%20court%20decisions> accessed 14 July 2023; European Parliament, ‘REPORT on artificial intelligence in criminal law and its use by the police and judicial authorities in criminal matters’ European Parliament (13 July 2021) <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2021-0232_EN.html> accessed 14 July 2023; Claire Brader, ‘AI Technology and the Justice System: Lords Committee Report’ UK Parliament House of Lords Library (23 November 2022) <https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/ai-technology-and-the-justice-system-lords-committee-report/> accessed 14 July 2023; Frederick Pinto, ‘Can AI Improve the Justice System? A Fairer Legal System May Need to Be a Little Less Human’ The Atlantic (13 February 2023) <https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/02/ai-justice-system/617275/> accessed 14 July 2023; and UNESCO, ‘AI and the Rule of Law: Capacity Building for Judicial Systems’ UNESCO (24 April 2023) <https://www.unesco.org/en/artificial-intelligence/rule-law/mooc-judges#:~:text=New%20Online%20Course%20on%20AI%20and%20the%20Rule%20of%20Law,-Register%20Here%3A%20Judges&text=Structured%20around%20six%20modules%2C%20it,AI%20ethics%20and%20governance%20issues> accessed 14 July 2023.
53 Chengwei Qin and others, ‘Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver?’ (arXiv, 15 Feburary 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.06476> accessed 17 July 2023; Viet Dac Lai and others, ‘ChatGpt Beyond English: Towards a Comprehensive Evaluation of Large Language Models in Multilingual Learning’ (arXiv, 12 April 2023) <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.05613.pdf≥ accessed 17 July 2023; Lucas Mearian, ‘What are LLMs, and How Are They Used in Generative AI?’ (Computerworld, 30 May 2023) <https://www.computerworld.com/article/3697649/what-are-large-language-models-and-how-are-they-used-in-generative-ai.html> accessed 17 July 2023; Cem Dilmegani, ‘Large Language Models: Complete Guide in 2023’ AI Multiple (21 June 2023) <https://research.aimultiple.com/large-language-models/> accessed 14 July 2023.
54 Luke Taylor, ‘Colombian Judge Says He Used ChatGPT in Ruling’ The Guardian (3 February 2023) <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/03/colombia-judge-chatgpt-ruling> accessed 14 July 2023; Bojana Kovač, ‘Law & ChatGPT: Will AI Take Over Lawyers and Judges?’ DiPLO (9 March 2023) <https://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/law-chatgpt-will-ai-take-over-lawyers-and-judges/> accessed 14 July 2023; Ben Cost, ‘Judge Asks ChatGPT to Decide Bail in Murder Trial’ New York Post (29 March 2023) <https://nypost.com/2023/03/29/judge-asks-chatgpt-for-decision-in-murder-trial/> accessed 14 July 2023; Jamie Johnson, ‘“Unethical” Judge Asks ChatGPT for Advice on Child’s Medical Rights’ The Telegraph (3 February 2023) <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/02/03/unethical-judge-asks-chatgpt-advice-childs-medical-rights/> accessed 14 July 2023; Sana Jamal, ‘Pakistani Judge Uses ChatGPT to Make Court Decision’ Gulf News (3 April 2023) <https://gulfnews.com/world/asia/pakistan/pakistani-judge-uses-chatgpt-to-make-court-decision-1.95104528> accessed 14 July 2023.
55 Bohannon (n 5); Srishti Singh Sisodia, ‘US Judge Fines Lawyers for Using ChatGPT to Produce Fake Legal History’ WION (23 June 2023) <https://www.wionews.com/technology/us-judge-fines-lawyers-for-using-chatgpt-to-produce-fake-legal-history-607938> accessed 15 July 2023.
56 Yiheng Liu and others, ‘Summary of ChatGPT/GPT-4 Research and Perspective Towards the Future of Large Language Models’ [2023] Meta-Radiology 100017; Julian Hazall, ‘Language Models Can Be Used to Effectively Scale Spear Phishing Campaigns’ [2023] arXiv e-prints 2305; and Gaurang Bansal and others, ‘Transforming Conversations with AI—A Comprehensive Study of ChatGPT’ (2024) Cognitive Computation 1.
57 ibid.
58 Radford and others, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’ Amazon Web Services (2018) <https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/openai-assets/research-covers/language-unsupervised/language_understanding_paper.pdf> accessed 19 July 2023; Neri Van Otten, ‘Top 20 Most Powerful Large Language Models for NLP Tasks & Transfer Learning in 2023’ Spot Intelligence (18 April 2023) <https://spotintelligence.com/2023/04/18/large-language-models-nlp/> accessed 16 July 2023; Md Saidur Rahaman and others, ‘From ChatGPT-3 to GPT-4: A Significant Advancement in AI-driven NLP Tools’ [2023] 2(1) Journal of Engineering and Emerging Technologies 1.
59 Niklas Dongesn, ‘Introduction to Natural Language Processing (NLP)’ (builtin, 11 October 2022) <https://builtin.com/data-science/introduction-nlp> accessed 17 July 2023; Analytics Insights, ‘Natural Language Processing (NLP) What It Is and Why It Matters’ SAS, (2023) <https://www.sas.com/en_za/insights/analytics/what-is-natural-language-processing-nlp.html> accessed 17 July 2023; IBM, ‘What is Natural Language Processing?’ IBM, (2023) <https://www.ibm.com/topics/natural-language-processing> accessed 17 July 2023.
60 Junichi Tsujii, ‘Natural Language Processing and Computational Linguistics’ (2021) 47(4) Computational Linguistics 707 <https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00420> accessed 17 July 2023.
61 IBM (n 59).
62 Surya Maddula, ‘NLP, NLU, and NLG’ Medium (19 June 2022) <https://medium.com/nerd-for-tech/nlp-nlu-and-nlg-7aa3d8d64e2f> accessed 17 July 2023; Diksha Khurana and others, ‘Natural Language Processing: State of the Art, Current Trends and Challenges’ (2023) 82 Multimedia Tools and Applications 3712.
63 Yujian Tang, ‘Natural Language Processing: Part of Speech Tagging’ Python Algos (6 November 2021) <https://pythonalgos.com/natural-language-processing-part-of-speech-tagging/> accessed 17 July 2023; Alebachew and Betselot Yitagesu, ‘Part of Speech Tagging: A Systematic Review of Deep Learning and Machine Learning Approaches’ (2022) 9 Journal of Big Data 10 < https://doi.org/10.1186/s40537-022-00561-y> accessed 17 July 2023; Daniel Jurafsky and James H Martin, Speech and Language Processing (3rd edn, Pearson Education 2022) <https://web.stanford.edu/~jurafsky/slp3/ed3book_jan122022.pdf> accessed 17 July 2023.
64 James Pustejovsky, The Generative Lexicon (MIT Press 1995).
65 Deborah Schiffrin, Approaches to Discourse: Language as Social Interaction (1st ed, Wiley-Blackwell 1994).
66 Stephen C Levinson, Pragmatics (CUP 1983).
67 Khurana and others (n 62).
68 Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio and Aaron Courville, Deep Learning (The MIT Press 2016).
69 Scott Novotney and others, ‘CUE Vectors: Modular Training of Language Models Conditioned on Diverse Contextual Signals’ Association for Computational Linguistics, (2022) <https://aclanthology.org/2022.findings-acl.265/> accessed 17 July 2023; and Ashley Pilipiszyn, ‘Better Language Models and Their Implications’ OpenAI, (2023) <https://openai.com/research/better-language-models> accessed 17 July 2023.
70 Sidi Lu and others, ‘Neural Text Generation: Past, Present and Beyond’ (arXiv, 15 March 2018) <https://arxiv.org/pdf/1803.07133.pdf> accessed 19 July 2023.
71 Anthony Lancaster, ‘Beyond Chatbots: the Rise of the Large Language Models’ Forbes (20 March 2023) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2023/03/20/beyond-chatbots-the-rise-of-large-language-models/> accessed 17 July 2023.
72 Dan Jurafsky and James Martin, Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition (2nd ed, Pearson 2008); Karen Hao, ‘The Race to Understand the Exhilarating, Dangerous World of Language AI’ MIT (Technology Review, 20 May 2021) <https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/05/20/1025135/ai-large-language-models-bigscience-project/accessed> 17 July 2023.
73 Daniel M Katz and others, ‘Natural Language Processing in the Legal Domain’ (arXiv 2023) <https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.12039> accessed on 29 May 2024; pS Content Team, ‘Revolutionizing Legal Research and Document Analysis with LLMs’ purpleslate (2024) <https://www.purpleslate.com/revolutionizing-legal-research-and-document-analysis-with-llms/> accessed 21 May 2024; Ankur Goel, ‘Revolutionizing Legal Document Analysis: Empowering Efficiency with GPT Models’ Medium (2024) <https://medium.com/@ankur.goel_34001/revolutionizing-legal-document-analysis-empowering-efficiency-with-gpt-models-fcd09224bc6d> accessed 21 May 2024.
74 Olga Alejandra Alcántara Francia, Miguel Nunez-del-Prado and Hugo Alatrista-Salas, ‘Survey of Text Mining Techniques Applied to Judicial Decisions Prediction’ (2022) 12(20) Applied Sciences 10200.
75 Jawid Ahmad Baktash and Mursal Dawodi, ‘Gpt-4: A Review on Advancements and Opportunities in Natural Language Processing’ (arXiv, 2023) <https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.03195> accessed on 29 May 2024; OpenAI, ‘GPT-4 Research’ (OpenAI, 2023) <https://openai.com/index/gpt-4-research/> accessed 21 May 2024.
76 Tom B Brown and others, ‘Language Models Are Few-Shot Learners’ (arXiv, 22 July 2020) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14165> accessed 17 July 202; Emily M Bender and Alexander Koller, ‘Climbing Towards NL: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data’ ACL Anthology (2020) <https://aclanthology.org/2020.acl-main.463/> accessed 17 July 2023.
77 Bonan Min and others, ‘Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing Via Large Pre-Trained Language Models: A Survey’ (arXiv, 1 November 2021) <https://arxiv.org/pdf/2111.01243v1.pdf> accessed 17 July 2023; Antoine Tardif, ‘Unveiling the Power of Large Language Models’ UNITE (22 April 2023) <https://www.unite.ai/large-language-models/> accessed 17 July 2023.
78 Konstantinos Roumeliotis and Nikolaos D Tselikas, ‘ChatGPT and Open-AI Models: A Preliminary Review’ (2023) 15(6) Future Internet 192; Guido Perscheid, ‘OpenAI: Pioneering the Future of Artificial Intelligence’ Medium (2023) <https://medium.com/deep-tech-innovation/openai-pioneering-the-future-of-artificial-intelligence-ff46a4b2da82> accessed 21 May 2024.
79 Radford and others, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’; FBE New Technologies Commission, ‘Lawyers in the Era of ChatGPT’ European Bars Federation, (June 2023) 4 <https://www.fbe.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/European-lawyers-in-the-era-of-ChatGPT-FBE-Guidelines-on-how-lawyers-should-take-advantage-of-the-opportunities-offered-by-large-language-models-and-gene-kopia.pdf> accessed 17 July 2023.
80 Interaction Design Foundation, ‘What Is General AI? — Updated 2024’ Interaction Design Foundation (2024) <https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/general-ai> accessed 21 May 2024; Toolify, ‘Exploring OpenAI’s Contributions to Artificial General Intelligence’ Toolify (2024) <https://www.toolify.ai/ai-news/exploring-openais-contributions-to-artificial-general-intelligence-1797061> accessed 21 May 2024.
81 Brown and others (n 76); Jacob Devlin and others, ‘BERT: Pre-Training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding’ ACL Anthology (2019) <https://aclanthology.org/N19-1423/> accessed 17 July 2023.
82 Alain Strowel, ‘ChatGPT and Generative AI tools: Theft of Intellectual Labor?’ [2023] 54 IIC 491; Llama 2 Outperforms GPT 3 in terms of performance and reaches a level of conversational model quality equivalent to that of ChatGPT; Rowan Cheung, ‘Meta Open-Sources ChatGPT Competitor’ The Rundown AI (19 July 2023) <https://www.therundown.ai/p/meta-llama-2> accessed 19 July 2023; BERT is developed by Google and trained on a massive amount of textual data widely used for various NLP tasks whereas RoBERTa is a variant of the BERT model that has been further optimised and fine-tuned. Stable Diffusion is a technique introduced by OpenAI to improve the quality and stability of image generation in generative models, particularly for images generated from text prompts; Junchen Zhuand and others, ‘MovieFactory: Automatic Movie Creation from Text using Large Generative Models for Language and Images’ (arXiv, 12 June 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.07257> accessed 19 July 2023.
83 Aakanksha Chowdhery and others, ‘PaLM: Scaaling Language Modelling with Pathways’ (arXiv, 5 October 2022) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.02311> accessed 17 July 2023; Google AI, ‘PaLM 2’ Google AI (2023) <https://ai.google/discover/palm2/> accessed 17 July 2023. PaLM is a recently introduced neural language model designed to tackle the issue of long-term context representation in NLP tasks. It has undergone training using the Pathways system, which equips it with the ability to generalise tasks across diverse domains and demonstrate high efficiency.
84 Karthik Valmeekam and others, ‘Large Language Models Still Can’t Plan (A Benchmark for LLMs on Planning and Reasoning About Change)’ (arXiv, 8 April 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.10498> accessed 17 July 2023.
85 Cem Dilmegani, ‘What Is Affective Computing / Emotion AI’ AI Multiple (January 2023) <https://research.aimultiple.com/what-is-affective-computing/#can-computers-really-understand-emotions> accessed 15 July; Suresh Rajasekaran, ‘Custom Training of Large Language Models (LLMs): A Detailed Guide with Code Samples’ DZone (22 April 2023) <https://dzone.com/articles/custom-training-of-large-language-models-a-compreh> accessed 17 July 2023.
86 Nova, ‘How BERT, GPT-3, MUM, and PaLM Changed the Face of NLP’ AI Tech Trend (2023) <https://aitechtrend.com/how-bert-gpt-3-mum-and-palm-changed-the-face-of-nlp/> accessed 21 May 2024; Chowdhery (n 83); Hossein Bahak and others, ‘Evaluating ChatGPT as a Question Answering System: A Comprehensive Analysis and Comparison with Existing Models’ (arXiv, 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.07592> accessed 21 May 2024; Rahib Imamguluyev, ‘The Rise of Chat GPT-3: Implications for Natural Language Processing and Beyond’ (2023) 4 International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews 4893; Khalid Nassiri, and Moulay Akhloufi, ‘Transformer Models Used for Text-Based Question Answering Systems’ (2023) 53 Applied Intelligence 10602–35.
87 Brown and others (n 76); Min and others (n 77).
88 Brown and others (n 76); Kumar Chandrakant, ‘Introduction to Large Language Models’ Baeldung (4 July 2023) <https://www.baeldung.com/cs/large-language-models> accessed 17 July 2023; Adrian Tam, ‘What Are Large Language Models’ Machine Learning Mastery (19 May 2023) <https://machinelearningmastery.com/what-are-large-language-models/> accessed 17 July 2023.
89 Brown and others (n 76); Xipeng Qiu and others, ‘Pre-Trained Models for Natural Language Processing: A Survey’ (arXiv, 23 June 2021) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.08271> accessed 17 July 2023; Jason Holmes and others, ‘ Evaluating Large Language Models on a Highly-Specialized Topic, Radiation Oncology Physics’ [2023] 12 Frontiers in Oncology <https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/oncology/articles/10.3389/fonc.2023.1219326/full> accessed 17 July 2023; David K Yi and others, ‘Probing for Understanding of English Verb Classes and Alternations in Large Pre-Trained Language Models’ (arXiv, 11 Sep 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.04811> accessed 17 July 2023.
90 Jinqi Lai and others, ‘Large Language Models in Law: A Survey’ (arXiv, 26 Nov 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.03718> accessed 21 May 2024.
91 Juan David Gutierrez, ‘ChatGPT in Colombian courts’ Verfassungsblog, (23 February 2023) <https://verfassungsblog.de/colombian-chatgpt/> accessed 17 July 2023.
92 Weicong Qin and Zhongxiang Sun, ‘Exploring the Nexus of Large Language Models and Legal Systems: A Short Survey’ (arXiv, 1 April 2024) <https://arxiv.org/html/2404.00990v1 accessed 21 May 2024>; Zhongxiang Sun, ‘A Short Survey of Viewing Large Language Models in Legal Aspect’ (arXiv, 17 March 2023)<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2303.09136> accessed 21 May 2024.
93 Min and others (n 77).
94 Brown and others (n 76).
95 Shraddha Goled, ‘How Pre-Finetuning Boosts Performance of Language Models’ AIM (4 February 2021) <https://analyticsindiamag.com/how-pre-finetuning-boosts-performance-of-language-models/> accessed 20 July 2023.
96 Min and others (n 77).
97 ibid.
98 Brown and others (n 76).
99 Xu Ma and others, ‘Rewrite the Stars’ (arXiv, 2024) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.19967> accessed 26 May 2024.
100 FBE New Technologies (n 79) at 5; Yue Yu and others, ‘Fine-Tuning Pre-Trained Language Model with Weak Supervision: A Contrastive-Regularized Self-Training Approach’ Association for Computer Linguistics Anthology (2021) <https://aclanthology.org/2021.naacl-main.84/> accessed 17 July 2023; Akash Takyar, ‘Fine-Tuning Pre-Trained Models For Generative AI Applications’ LeewayHertz (2023) <https://www.leewayhertz.com/fine-tuning-pre-trained-models/> accessed 17 July 2023.
101 Sean Owen, ‘Fine-Tuning Large Language Models with Hugging Face and DeepSpeed’ databricks (20 March 2023) <https://www.databricks.com/blog/2023/03/20/fine-tuning-large-language-models-hugging-face-and-deepspeed.html> accessed 17 July 2023; Kai Lv and others, ‘Full Parameter Fine-Tuning for Large Language Models with Limited Resources’ (arXiv, 16 June 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.09782> accessed 17 July 2023.
102 Edward J Hu and others, ‘LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Models’ (arXiv, 16 October 2021) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2106.09685> accessed 17 July 2023; Saturn Cloud, ‘What are Large Language Models and How Do They Work?’ SaturnCloud (7 April 2023) <https://saturncloud.io/blog/what-are-large-language-models-and-how-do-they-work/> accessed 17 July 2023.
103 FBE New Technologies Commission (n 79) 5.
104 Min and others (n 77).
105 Radford and others, ‘Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training’.
106 Junyi Li and others, ‘Pre-Trained Language Models for Text Generation: A Survey’ (arXiv, 25 May 2021) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.10311> accessed 17 July 2023.
107 Brown and others (n 76).
108 FBE New Technologies Commission (n 79) 5.
109 Tianyu Wu and others, ‘A Brief Overview of ChatGPT: The History, Status Quo and Potential Future Development’ IEEE/CAAJ (May 2023) <https://www.ieee-jas.net/article/doi/10.1109/JAS.2023.123618?pageType=en> accessed 17 July 2023; Fotios Spyropoulos and Evangelia Androulaki, ‘Aspects of Artificial Intelligence on E-justice and Personal Data Limitations’ (2023) 26(3) JLERI 1; Cade Metz and Karen Weise, ‘Microsoft Bets Big on the Creator of ChatGPT in Race to Dominate A.I.’ The NewYork Times (12 Jan 2023) <https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/12/technology/microsoft-openai-chatgpt.html> accessed on 15 July 2023.
110 Natalie, ‘What is ChatGPT?’ OpenAI (2021) <https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6783457-what-is-chatgpt> accessed 14 July 2023; Rosie Wild and Anna-Rose Davies, ‘Disclosure & ChatGPT: the Future Is AI?’ [2023] 173 NLJ 19.
111 Wild and Davies (n 110).
112 Spyropoulos and Androulaki(n 109); Rupert Macey-Dare, ‘ChatGPT & Generative AI Systems as Quasi-Expert Legal Advice Lawyers - Case Study Considering Potential Appeal Against Conviction of Tom Hayes’ SSRN (30 January 2023) <https://ssrn.com/abstract=4342686> accessed 15 July 2023; Andrew M Perlman, ‘The Implications of ChatGPT for Legal Services and Society’ SSRN (5 December 2022) <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4294197> accessed 15 July 2023
113 International Trademark Association, ‘AI and the Legal World: An Interview with Richard Susskind’ INTA, (6 2023) <https://www.inta.org/perspectives/interviews/ai-and-the-legal-world-an-interview-with-richard-susskind/> accessed 21 May 2024; Isha Marathe, ‘Beware of “Technological Myopia,” Richard Susskind Says About GPT-3.5’ Legaltech News (2023) <https://www.law.com/legaltechnews/2023/02/23/beware-of-technological-myopia-richard-susskind-says-about-gpt-3-5/> accessed 21 May 2024; Richard Susskind: The Lionel Cohen Lecture 2023: Artificial Intelligence and the Law in the 2nd Quarter of the Twenty-First Century (Hebrew University of Jerusalem 30 May 2023) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAcNvdgodvA> accessed 21 May 2024.
114 Roger Smith, ‘ChatGPT: Time to Get on Board’ [2023] 173 NLJ 7.
115 FBE New Technologies Commission (n 80) at 3; OpenAI, ‘ChatGPT: Optimizing Language Models for Dialogue’ OpenAI (9 November 2022) <https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt> accessed 17 July 2023; Rupert Macey-Dare, ‘How ChatGPT and Generative AI Systems will Revolutionize Legal Services and the Legal Profession’ (SSRN, 22 February 2023) <https://ssrn.com/abstract=4366749> accessed 17 July 2023.
116 OpenAI, ‘Custom Instructions for ChatGPT’ OpenAI (20 July 2023) <https://openai.com/blog/custom-instructions-for-chatgpt> accessed 20 July 2023; FBE New Technologies Commission (n 79).
117 OpenAI, ‘GPT-4 Technical Report’ (OpenAI, 2023) <https://cdn.openai.com/papers/gpt-4.pdf> accessed 17 July 2023.
118 ibid; Ben Decrico and Zoe Kleinman, ‘OpenAI Announces ChatGPT Successor GPT-4’ BBC News (14 March 2023) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64959346> accessed 20 July 2023.
119 Natalie (n 110); Wild and Davies (n 110).
120 The Boston Globe, ‘Harvard Student’s ChatGPT Experiment Reveals Disruption in Store for Higher Education’ The Boston Globe (25 July 2023).
121 Wu and others (n 109).
122 As of now, specific details about GPT-4 have not been publicly revealed, adding an element of uncertainty to its capabilities.
123 Wu and others (n 109).
124 Minhyeok Lee, ‘A Mathematical Interpretation of Autoregressive Generative Pre-trained Transformer and Self-Supervised Learning’ (MDPI, 25 May 2023) <https://doi.org/10.3390/math11112451> accessed 17 July 2023.
125 Wenxiang Jiao and others, ‘Is ChatGPT a Good Translator? Yes with GPT-4 as the Engine’ (arXiv, 19 March 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.08745> accessed 17 July 2023.
126 Stephen Wolfram, ‘What Is ChatGPT Doing … and Why Does It Work?’ (Stephen Wolfram Writings, 14 February 2023) <https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-doing-and-why-does-it-work/> accessed 17 July 2023.
127 ibid.
128 The process of text and data mining (TDM) leads to the GenAI outputs. See Kalpana Tyagi, ‘Copyright, Text & Data Mining and the Innovation Dimension of Generative AI’ [2024] JIPLP.
129 Luke Taylor, ‘Judges Allowed to Use ChatGPT to Write Legal Rulings’ The Week (12 December 2023) <https://theweek.com/law/judges-allowed-to-use-chatgpt-to-write-legal-rulings> accessed 22 May 2024; Hibaq Farah, ‘Court of Appeal Judge Praises ‘Jolly Useful’ ChatGPT After Asking It for Legal Summary’ The Guardian (15 September 2023) <https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/sep/15/court-of-appeal-judge-praises-jolly-useful-chatgpt-after-asking-it-for-legal-summary> accessed 22 May 2024; James Titcomb, ‘Judges Given Green Light to Use ChatGPT in Legal Rulings’ The Telegraph (12 December 2023) <https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/12/12/judges-given-green-light-use-chatgpt-legal-rulings/> accessed on 29 May 2024.
130 Digital Watch Observatory, ‘Indian Judge Used ChatGPT in a Criminal Case’ Digital Watch (2023) <https://dig.watch/updates/indian-judge-used-chatgpt-in-a-criminal-case> accessed 22 May 2024; Pallavi Pundir, ‘This Court Used ChatGPT to Decide Bail in a Murder Case’ VICE (29 Mar 2023) <https://www.vice.com/en/article/ak3dzk/india-court-chatgpt-bail-murder-case> accessed 22 May 2024.
131 Jamal (n 54).
132 CBS News, ‘Colombian Judge Uses ChatGPT in Ruling on Child’s Medical Rights Case’ CBS News (2 Feb 2023) <https://www.cbsnews.com/news/colombian-judge-uses-chatgpt-in-ruling-on-childs-medical-rights-case/> accessed 22 May 2024.
133 Wu and others (n 109).
134 Katy Allan, ‘Judge, Jury, and ChatGPT: Changing the Legal Landscape’ AI Magazine (2023) <https://aimagazine.com/articles/judge-jury-and-chatgpt-changing-the-legal-landscape> accessed 22 May 2024.
135 OpenAI, ‘GPT-4 Technical Report’ (n 117).
136 Macey-Dare, ‘ChatGPT & Generative AI Systems as Quasi-Expert Legal Advice Lawyers - Case Study Considering Potential Appeal Against Conviction of Tom Hayes’ (n 112); Perlman (n 112).
137 P Gandhi and V Talwar, ‘Artificial Intelligence and ChatGPT in the Legal Context’ (2023) 75(1) Indian Journal of Medical Sciences 1-2; Michael A Kaplan, Raymond S Cooper and Ruth Fong Zimmerman, ‘Lawyers and ChatGPT: Best Practices’ LexisNexis (2023) <https://www.lexisnexis.com/pdf/practical-guidance/ai/lawyers-and-chatgpt-best-practices.pdf> accessed 22 May 2024.
138 Ziquan Liu and others, ‘Improved Fine-Tuning by Better Leveraging Pre-Training Data’ (arXiv, 2022) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12292> accessed 24 May 2024; Max Logvinenko, ‘How to Train ChatGPT on Custom Data: A Complete Guide’ Requestum Blog (February 16, 2024) <https://requestum.com/blog/how-to-train-chatgpt-on-custom-data> accessed 24 May 2024; OpenAI, ‘Improvements to Data Analysis in ChatGPT’ OpenAI (May 16, 2024) <https://openai.com/index/improvements-to-data-analysis-in-chatgpt/> accessed 24 May, 2024.
139 RenewLife, ‘The Future of AI in Jury Decision-Making: Balancing Justice and Automation’ Medium (2023) <https://medium.com/@RenewLife/the-future-of-ai-in-jury-decision-making-balancing-justice-and-automation-92afb425e3ad> accessed 24 May 2024; Macey-Dare, ‘ChatGPT & Generative AI Systems as Quasi-Expert Legal Advice Lawyers - Case Study Considering Potential Appeal Against Conviction of Tom Hayes’ (n 112).
140 Xinyi Wang and others, ‘ChatGPT Performs on the Chinese National Medical Licensing Examination’ Research Square (16 February 2023) <https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-2584079/v1/f345db12-0791-436e-983e-75f38e4d68dc.pdf?c=1676585284> accessed 17 July 2023; Tiffany H Kung and others, ‘Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI Assisted Medical Education Using Large Language Models’ PLoS Digital Health (9 February 2023) <https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198> accessed 17 July 2023.
141 Wang and others (n 144); Tiffany H Kung and others, ‘Performance of ChatGPT on USMLE: Potential for AI Assisted Medical Education Using Large Language Models’ PLoS Digital Health (9 February 2023) <https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000198> accessed 17 July 2023.
142 Yaqi Xie and others, ‘Translating Natural Language to Planning Goals with Large-language Models’ (arXiv, 10 February 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.05128> accessed 17 July 2023.
143 Lakshmi Varanasi, ‘GPT-4 Can Ace the Bar but It Only Has a Decent Chance of Passing the CFA exams. Here's a list of difficult exams the ChatGPT and GPT-4 have passed. Here’s a List of Difficult Exams the ChatGPT and GPT-4 Have Passed’ (INSIDER, 5 November 2023) <https://www.businessinsider.com/list-here-are-the-exams-chatgpt-has-passed-so-far-2023-1?r=US&IR=T> accessed 17 November 2023.
144 Spyropoulos and Androulaki (n 109).
145 The Impact Lawyers, ‘A Court Has Used the ChatGPT to Issue a Sentence’ The Impact Lawyers (19 June 2023) <https://theimpactlawyers.com/articles/a-court-has-used-the-chatgpt-to-issue-a-sentence> accessed 17 July 2023.
146 ibid.
147 Taylor, ‘Colombian Judge Says He Used ChatGPT in Ruling’ (n 54); Ben Cost, ‘Judge Ask ChatGPT to Decide Bail in Murder Trial’ New York Post (29 March 2023) <https://nypost.com/2023/03/29/judge-asks-chatgpt-for-decision-in-murder-trial/> accessed 14 July 2023.
148 The Impact Lawyers (n 145).
149 Perlman (n 112); Francine Ryan and Liz Hardie, ‘ChatGPT, I Have a Legal Question? The Impact of Generative AI Tools on Law Clinics and Access to Justice’ (2024) 31(1) IJCL 166.
150 Smith (n 114); Max Zahn, ‘Elon Musk Slams AI ‘Bias’ and Calls for ‘TruthGPT’ Experts Questions His Neutrality’ GMA (19 April 2023) <https://www.goodmorningamerica.com/news/story/elon-musk-slams-ai-bias-calls-truthgpt-experts-98660483> accessed 18 July 2023; Rounak Jain, ‘Marc Andreessen Warns Of “Draconian Censorship” And “Bias” In AI Chatbots: Elon Musk Vows Grok Will “Hew To the Truth”’ Benzinga (2024) <https://www.benzinga.com/news/24/02/37231141/marc-andreessen-warns-of-draconian-censorship-and-bias-in-ai-chatbots-elon-musk-vows-grok-will-hew-t> accessed 28 May 2024.
151 Hanna Rosin, ‘AI Won’t Really Kill Us All, Will It? The Atlantic (2023) <AI Won’t Really Kill Us All, Will It? - The Atlantic> accessed 15 May 2024; Kenan Malik, ‘Elon Musk v Open AI: Tech Giants Are Inciting Existential Fears to Evade Scrutiny’ The Guardian (2024) <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/mar/10/ai-wont-destroy-us-but-tech-giants-use-fear-it-will-to-evade-scrutiny> accessed 15 May 2024; Kara Manke, ‘How to Keep AI From Killing Us All’ Berkely News (2024) <https://news.berkeley.edu/2024/04/09/how-to-keep-ai-from-killing-us-all/> accessed 15 May 2024.
152 Shangying Hua, Shuangci Jin and Shengyi Jiang, ‘The Limitations and Ethical Considerations of ChatGPT’ (2024) 6(1) Data Intelligence 201–39.
153 Nancy J Allen, ‘What is Grok and How is it Related to Elon Musk’s Truth GPT?’ The Coin Republic (7 February 2024) <https://www.thecoinrepublic.com/2024/02/07/what-is-grok-and-how-is-it-related-to-elon-musks-truth-gpt/> accessed 29 May 2024; Ellen Glover, ‘Grok: What We Know About Musk’s AI Chatbot’ Built In (9 May 2024) <https://builtin.com/articles/grok> accessed 29 May 2024.
154 Michael Kan, ‘Elon Musk Teases TruthGPT, a “Maximum Truth-Seeking AI”’ PCMag (18 April 2023) <https://www.pcmag.com/news/elon-musk-teases-truthgpt-a-maximum-truth-seeking-ai> accessed 29 May 2024; Anthony Cuthbertson, ‘Grok vs ChatGPT: How Elon Musk’s “Spicy” AI Compares to “Woke” Alternatives’ The Independent (7 November 2023) <https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/grok-vs-chatgpt-xai-musk-b2442866.html> accessed 29 May 2024.
155 Kan (n 155); Liv McMahon, ‘Elon Musk Sues ChatGPT-maker Open AI Over Microsoft Links’ BBC (2024) <https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-68445981> accessed 15 May 2024; Elon Musk v Sam Altman and OpenAI, Inc. (complaint filed 29 February 2024, San Francisco Superior Court) <https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/musk-v-altman-openai-complaint-sf.pdf> accessed 29 May 2024.
156 Ali Borji, ‘A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures’ (arXiv, 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.03494> accessed 17 July 2023; Simon Frieder and others, ‘Mathematical capabilities’ (arXiv, 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.13867> accessed 17 July 2023.
157 Tom Schick and others, ‘Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use Tools’ (arXiv, 9 February 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.04761#:~:text=In%20this%20paper%2C%20we%20show,results%20into%20future%20token%20prediction> accessed 17 July 2023.
158 OpenAI, ‘ChatGPT Plugins’ OpenAI (2023) <https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt-plugins> accessed 17 July 2023.
159 Bhargavi Paranjape and others, ‘ART: Automatic Multi-step Reasoning and Tool-use for Large Language Models’ (arXiv, 16 March 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.09014#:~:text=We%20introduce%20Automatic%20Reasoning%20and,use%20from%20a%20task%20library> accessed 17 July 2023; Wenxuan Zhou and others, ‘Context-faithful Prompting for Large Language Models’ (arXiv, 20 March 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11315> accessed 17 July 2023; Aman Madaan and others, ‘Self-refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-feedback’ (arXiv, 25 May 2023) <https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.17651> accessed 17 July 2023.
160 Jeremy Gan, ‘Authors Sue ChatGPT Creators for Using Their Books to Train AI Without Consent’ (Dexerto, 10 July 2023) <https://www.dexerto.com/tech/authors-sue-chatgpt-creators-for-using-their-books-to-train-ai-without-consent-2205046/> accessed 17 July 2023.
161 Blake Brittain, ‘Lawsuit Says OpenAI Violated US Authors’ Copyrights to Train AI Chatbot’ Reuters (29 June 2023) <https://www.reuters.com/legal/lawsuit-says-openai-violated-us-authors-copyrights-train-ai-chatbot-2023-06-29/> accessed 17 July 2023; Ella Creamer, ‘Authors File a Lawsuit Against OpenAI for Unlawfully “Ingesting” Their Books’ The Guardian (5 July 2023) <https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/jul/05/authors-file-a-lawsuit-against-openai-for-unlawfully-ingesting-their-books> accessed 17 July 2023.
162 Isha Marathe, ‘Judges, Attorneys React to Federal Court Generative AI Order: Too Hot, Too Cold, or Just Right?’ ALM Law.COM (1 June 2023) <https://www.law.com/legaltechnews/2023/06/01/judges-attorneys-react-to-federal-court-generative-ai-order-too-hot-too-cold-or-just-right/?slreturn=20230608173131> accessed 17 July 2023; Brian Inkster, ‘ChatGPT and Legal Gibberish’ The Time Blawg (10 June 2023) <https://thetimeblawg.com/2023/06/10/chatgpt-and-legal-gibberish/#:~:text=The%20Judge%20in%20the%20infamous,realistic%20term%20than%20legal%20hallucinations!> accessed 17 July 2023.
163 Marathe, ‘Judges, Attorneys React to Federal Court Generative AI Order: Too Hot, Too Cold, or Just Right?’ (n 162).
164 ibid.
165 ibid.
166 Gutierrez (n 91).
167 See Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance for Judicial Office Holders, 2023) <https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AI-Judicial-Guidance.pdf> accessed 17 May 2024 Judges should ensure AI chatbots can disable chat history. ChatGPT and Google Bard offer this, but Bing Chat does not. User control enhances transparency, accountability, and autonomy.
168 Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (n 167); Kalliopi Terzidou, ‘The Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Judiciary and Its Compliance with the Right to a Fair Trial’ Thomson Reuters (2022) <https://orbilu.uni.lu/bitstream/10993/51591/1/kterzidou_jja_v31_pt3.pdf> accessed 29 May 2024; Council of Europe, European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ), ‘Cyberjustice and Artificial Intelligence Used in the Field of Justice’ Council of Europe (2023) <https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-working-group-cyber-just> accessed 29 May 2024.
169 Pyrrho Investments Ltd v MWB Property Ltd [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch); Brown v BCA Trading [2016] EWCA 1464 (Ch); Civil Procedure Rules 2022, PD 57AD (supports the use of technology in disclosure); Civil Procedure Rules, PD 31B (encourages the use of agreed software tools and automated methods of searching).
170 Triumph Controls UK Limited v Primus International Holding Co. [2018] EWCH 176 (TCC).
171 Wild and Davies (n 110).
172 CDPA 1988 s3(2)(3). This article explores copyright in the judgment and not the copyright in the report of the judgment. See J A L Sterling, ‘Crown Copyright in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth Countries’ (1996) 10 IPJ 157.
173 Andreas Rahmatian, ‘Originality in UK Copyright Law: the Old “Skill and Labour” Doctrine Under Pressure’ (2012) 44 IIC 4. Until 2012, the UK followed the principle ‘author’s own skill, labour and judgment’.
174 Case C-5/08 Infopaq International v Danske Dagblades Forening.
175 Case C-604/10 Football Dataco Ltd and others v Yahoo! UK Ltd and others linking originality to the author’s ‘free and creative choices’. The court used similar phraseology explaining how photographers can fulfil the originality criteria, that is, the author’s own intellectual creation in Case C-145/10 [92], Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerlagsGmbH and Others and using the phrase ‘it reflects the author’s personality’ [88].
176 Yang Xiao, ‘Decoding Authorship: Is There Really No Place for an Algorithmic Author Under Copyright Law’ (2023) 54 IIC 5.
177 See Ginsburg referring to the Berne Convention when assessing works produced by machines in Jane C Ginsburg, ‘People Not Machines: Authorship and What It Means in the Berne Convention’ (2018) 49 IIC 131.
178 Advocate General Trstenjak in Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerlagsGmbH and Others Case C-145/10 [121].
179 Judiciary, ‘Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Copyright’ (Judiciary) <https://www.judiciary.uk/copyright/> accessed 3 July 2023.
180 Strowel (n 82).
181 Jyh-An Lee, ‘Computer Generated Works Under the CDPA 1988’ in Jyh-An Lee, Reto Hilty and Kung-Chung Liu (eds), Artificial Intelligence & Intellectual Property (OUP Press 2021) 177, 180; Ryan Abbott and Elizabeth Rothman, ‘AI Generated Output and Intellectual Property Rights: Takeaways from the Artificial Inventor Project’ (2023) 45(4) EIPR 215, 215.
182 Lee (n 181) 177, 180.
183 ibid 177, 184; Tshimanga Kongolo, ‘Global Legal Intellectual Property Issues Generated by Artificial Intelligence’ (2023) 25(4) EIPR 196, 199.
184 Kongolo (n 183) 200.
185 Nova Productions Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] EWHC 24(Ch) 20 January 2006.
186 Lee (n 181) 183; Kongolo (n 183) 200.
187 Infopaq (n 174).
188 Ginsburg (n 174) 1072.
189 Benjamin Goh, ‘Two Ways of Looking at a Printed Book’ (2022) 85(3) MLR 697.
190 Rahmatian (n 173).
191 See Feist Publications Inc v Rural Telephone Service Co, 499 US 340 (1991) rejecting the ‘sweat of the brow’ approach.
192 Express Newspapers Plc v Liverpool Daily Post & Echo Plc and Others [1985] 1 WLR 1089.
193 ibid 1093.
194 Florian De Rouck, ‘Moral Rights & AI Environments: the Unique Bond Between Intelligent Agents and Their Creations’ (2019) 14(4) JIPLP 299.
195 Digital Media Licensing Association, ‘Shira Perlmutter Discussed Generative AI, Prompt Engineering and Copyright’ <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZdOI2inQ4A> accessed 3 July 2023.
196 Abbott and Rothman (n 181) 221.
197 Milmo and Agency (n 6).
198 Jake Maher, ‘2nd Circ. Rebukes Atty for Fake Citation in Latest AI Blunder’ Law360 (30 January 2024) <https://www.law360.com/legalethics/articles/1791788?nl_pk=d17b40f1-7050-4d7b-8dcf-3512f65711fb&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=legalethics&utm_content=2024-01-31&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=0> accessed 31 January 2024.
199 Both are natural language processing technologies that use machine learning and deep learning, see .
200 Intellectual Property Office, ‘Artificial Intelligence Call for Views: Copyright and Related Rights’ GOV.UK (23 March 2021) <https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-call-for-views/artificial-intelligence-call-for-views-copyright-and-related-rights#How%20Ai%20Systems%20Use%20Copyright%20Works%20and%20Data> accessed 27 June 2023.
201 The matter is whether copyright protected work used to train generative AI can be justified as fair use. These points are to be discussed in the US pending cases such as Getty Images (US) Inc v Stability AI Inc, Case 1:23-cv-00135-UNA; and Paul Tremblay and Mona Awad v OpenAI, Case 3:23-cv-03223. These cases argued that the AI was trained by copying the material owned by them (training dataset), therefore the AI output relies on information extracted from the dataset which belongs to the claimants. In the UK, consultation of AI-generated works and copyright protection, released on 28 June 2022 recommends for the adoption of a broad copyright exception for text and data mining including for commercial use. For more information see Intellectual Property Office, ‘Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: Copyright and Patents: Government Response to Consultation’ GOV.UK (28 June 2022) <https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/artificial-intelligence-and-ip-copyright-and-patents/outcome/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-copyright-and-patents-government-response-to-consultation> accessed 29 June 2023.
202 Lee (n 181) 191.
203 Kongolo (n 183) 205. Scholars refer to this right akin to neighbouring rights. See Paul Lambert, ‘Computer-Generated Works and Copyright: Selfies, Traps, Robots, AI and Machine Learning’ (2017) 39(1) EIPR 12.
204 Other jurisdictions that recognise computer generated work to be protected by copyright are Hong Kong, Ireland, and South Africa. Lee (n 181) 177.
205 See UK CDPA 1988 s 9(3) and s178, and NZ Copyright Act 1994 s5(1)(a).
206 The US Copyright Law protects works developed directly or with the aid of a machine or device (17 USC §102(a), however, the Compendium of US Copyright Office Practices s133.2, imposes that works to be protected must be ‘created by a human being’. This view was seen in Naruto v Slater where a monkey took a selfie and the court ruled that to qualify for copyright protection, the work must be ‘created by a human being’, Case no 15-cv-04324-WHO (N.D. Calif 2016). This has been the view in cases produced by AI too such as the artwork produced by DABUS on 03 November 2018 which the US Copyright Office rejected on 14 February 2022 noting that ‘human authorship is a prerequisite to copyright protection’ in Thaler v Perlmutter, Case No.1:2022cv01564 (CCD files 02 June, 2022); AI-assisted comic book Zarya of the Dawn, which initially received US copyright registration in September 2022, was revised in February 2023, asserting Kris Kashtanova as author for the parts of the book written and arranged by Kashtanova but revoking copyright for the images produced by Midjourney. See Blake Brittain, ‘AI-created Images Lose U.S. Copyrights in Test for New Technology’ Reuters (23 February 2023) <https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-created-images-lose-us-copyrights-test-new-technology-2023-02-22/> accessed 30 June 2023.
207 While the Australia Copyright Act 1968(Cth) does not explicitly define the term author, in few of its sections, it refers to a ‘person’ e.g., s32, s35(5)(a)(b), and s208(1). See Achohs Pty Ltd v Ucorop Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 577 confirmed on appeal.
208 Xiao (n 176).
209 Lee (n 181) 177, 192; and Jane C Ginsburg and Luke Ali Budiardjo, ‘Authors and Machines’ (2019) 34(2) Berkeley TechLJ 597.
210 Lambert (n 203) 12.
211 AI itself is writing codes, and several researchers believe we are near the Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). See Antoine Tardif, ‘What Is the Law of Accelerating Returns? How it Leads to AGI’ Unite.AI (24 June 2023); Wall Street Journal, ‘Tesla AI is Actually Very Advanced: Elon Musk on AI, China, Twitter and More’Wall Street Journal YouTube channel (June 2023) <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDy7s1SDDn4&t=13s> accessed 3 July 2023; The Diary of a CEO, ‘Emergency Episode: Ex-Google Officer Finally Speaks Out on the Dangers of AI! - Mo Gawda’ <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk-nQ7HF6k4> accessed 3 July 2023.
212 ‘Personality’ does not exist in this type of works and thus, no moral rights exist. However, while there is no paternity right to claim, it is good practice to acknowledge the sources due to integrity and thus, it is envisaged that AI should be referred as the source.
213 P Bernt Hugenholtz and Pedro Quintais, ‘Copyright and Artificial Creation: Does EU copyright Law Protect AI-assisted Output?’ (2021) 52 IIC 1190, 1200.
214 Jacob Turner, Robot Rules: Regulating Artificial Intelligence (Palgrave Macmillan 2019) 325.
215 The courts have yet to interpret the word arrangement regarding computer generated work and furthermore, AI generative work. Lambert (n 203) 17; and Hugenholtz and Quintais (n 213) 1201.
216 Hugenholtz and Quintais (n 213) 1201.
217 ibid.
218 Kongolo (n 183) 196.
219 The AI Canvas, ‘The Legal Implications of Generative AI with Matt Hervey’ The AI Canvas podcast (5 July 2023) <https://podcast.adsp.ai/2168882/13155592-the-ai-canvas-the-legal-implications-of-generative-ai-with-matt-hervey?t=0> accessed 2 July 2023. Hervey is partner at Gowling WLG, London where he is the head of AI law.
220 Xiao (n 177) 17; Pratap Devarapalli, ‘Machine Learning to Machine Owning: Redefining the Copyright Ownership from the Perspective of Australian, US, UK and EU Law’ (2018) EIPR 722, 726.
221 Xiao (n 176) 17.
222 Lee (n 181) 192.
223 ibid 193.
224 Nova Productions Ltd v Mazooma Games Ltd [2006] EWHC 24 (Ch) [105-6].
225 Lionel Bently and Laura Biron, ‘Discontinuities Between Legal Conceptions of Authorship and Social Practices What, if Anything, Is to Be Done?’ in Mireille van Eechoud (eds), The Work of Authorship (Amsterdam University Press 2014) 238.
226 See N Nevejan, ‘European Civil Law Rules in Robotics: Study for the JURI Committee’ Publication Office of the European Union (October 2016).
227 Dhillon Mahal, ‘A Comparative Analysis of the Suitability of UK and EU Copyright Law for Protecting Computer Generated Work’ (University of York, Law Society, 16 December 2022) <http://www.yorklawsociety.net/property-and-equity/2022/12/16/computer-generated-work-how-does-intellectual-property-law-specifically-copyright-apply#_ftn9> accessed 27 June 2023.
228 Yet, in June 2022 the result of a consultation done by the UK Intellectual Property Office, recommends no change to the law on computer generated works. See Intellectual Property Office, ‘Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property: Copyright and Patents: Government Response to Consultation’ GOV.UK (28 June 2022) <https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/artificial-intelligence-and-ip-copyright-and-patents/outcome/artificial-intelligence-and-intellectual-property-copyright-and-patents-government-response-to-consultation> accessed 29 June 2023. For more information see Abbott and Rothman (n 181).
229 Ziv Epstein, Sysney Levine, David Rand and Iyad Rahwan, ‘Who Gets the Credits for AI-generated Art?’ (2020) iScience 23, 101515, September 25, 2020.
230 Kongolo (n 183) 198.
231 This also opens other queries such as legitimacy and accountability.
232 CDPA 1988 s11(3).
233 All judges are appointed by Royal Warrant upon recommendation by the Lord Chancellor, see Courts and Tribunal Judiciary, ‘List of Members of the Courts Judiciary’ <https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/who-are-the-judiciary/list-of-members-of-the-judiciary/> accessed 21 June 2023. See also Courts and Tribunal Judiciary, ‘Traditions of the Courts’ <https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/history-of-the-judiciary-in-england-and-wales/court-traditions/> accessed 29 June 2023.
234 The Freedom of Information Act 2000 (in force since January 2005) provides society with two rights of access: the right to be told if the information is held by public authority and, the right to be provided with the information. See The National Archives, ‘The Public Records System’s’ News (2022) <https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/about/news/the-national-archives-to-publish-court-judgments/> accessed 21 June 2023.
235 To use copyright information, it needs to get permission from the copyright owner.
236 Hazel Robert and Mark Glover, ‘The Impact of Freedom of Information on Whitehall’ (2011) 89(4) Public Administration 1664.
237 Open Government Licence (OGL) for public sector information. The OGL is compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution License and the Open Data Commons Attribution License.
238 Publication is only from the Upper Tribunals, High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. See The National Archives, ‘The National Archives to Publish Court Judgements’ News (2022) <https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/legislation/public-records-act/public-records-system/#Access%20to%20Public%20Records> accessed 21 June 2023.
1 Xingxing Zhang, Juveria Shah and Mengjie Han, ‘ChatGPT for fast learning of positive energy district (PED): A trial testing and comparison with expert discussion results’ (MDPI, 25 May 2023) <https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/13/6/1392> accessed 20 July 2023
239 Sofia Bettiza ‘Italian Uproar Over Judge’s 10-second groping rule’ BBC (13 July 2023) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-66174352> accessed 13 July 2023.
240 Spyropoulos and Androulaki (n 110); Kwan Yuen Iu and Vanessa Man-Yi Wong, ‘ChatGPT by OpenAI: The End of litigation lawyers?’ SSRN (26 January 2023) <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4339839> accessed 17 July 2023.
241 Triumph Controls UK Ltd v Primus International Holding Co [2018] EWCA 176 (TCC).
242 FBE New Technologies (n 79).
243 Janu Rose, ‘A Judge Just Used ChatGpt to Make a Court Decision’ Motherboard (3 February 2023) <https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7bdmv/judge-used-chatgpt-to-make-court-decision> accessed 17 July 2023.
244 Milmo and Agency (n 7); Melissa Hekkila, ‘How Judges, Not Politicians, Could Dictate America’s AI Rules’ MIT Technology Review (17 July 2023) <https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/07/17/1076416/judges-lawsuits-dictate-ai-rules/> accessed 19 July 2023; Cat Zakrzewski, ‘FTC Investigates OpenAI Over Data Leak and ChatGPT’s Inaccuracy’ The Washington Post (13 July 2023) <https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/07/13/ftc-openai-chatgpt-sam-altman-lina-khan/> accessed 19 July 2023; Jennifer Korn, ‘Getty Images Suing the Makers of Popular AI Art Tool for Allegedly Stealing Photos’ CNN Business (18 January 2023) <https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/17/tech/getty-images-stability-ai-lawsuit/index.html> accessed 19 July 2023.