For the casual observer, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) deals in the 20th century occurred in a staid and established world carefully controlled and choreographed by Wall Street investment bankers and lawyers.
Like poorly-behaved school children, new technologies and intellectual property (IP) are increasingly disrupting the M&A establishment. Cybersecurity has become the latest disruptive newcomer to the M&A party.

For the casual observer, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) deals in the 20th century occurred in a staid and established world carefully controlled and choreographed by Wall Street investment bankers and lawyers.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN LawJournalNewsletters
Already have an account? Sign In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate access, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or call 1-877-256-2473.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2026 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Despite widespread investment into AI across the legal industry, just a small group of law firms are consistently realizing measurable returns in operational speed, financial visibility and revenue performance, according to a new report from Law.com and legal industry technology provider Elite.
Most firms are aiming their newest tools at the work they already do — pouring their most powerful technology into running the same tasks a little faster. But when everyone automates the same tasks at once, no one pulls ahead. That reaches the future a little faster while leaving a firm’s largest opportunity untouched — and that opportunity isn’t doing more of the existing work, but transforming how the high-value work gets done.
AI is becoming both an accelerant and a distraction for cybersecurity. In many respects, AI is acting as a stress test for existing security operations by exposing how difficult many organizations still find it to enforce basic controls consistently at scale.
Artificial intelligence is rapidly embedding itself into legal workflows, but much of the conversation treats all use cases as if they carry the same level of risk, even if they do not. The more useful question is not whether AI works, but where it can be safely applied and where it cannot.