Over the last decade, technology-assisted review (TAR) has become a preferred choice in the e-discovery toolkit. Now, as generative AI gains traction, legal teams face a new challenge: creating a technology stack that offers the best balance of efficiency, cost and usability.
While the amount of AI legislation introduced in various states is relatively limited, the scope of issues being legislated is quite broad. Despite the many uncertainties that remain to be clarified, there are actually many parallels between how data privacy laws took shape five years ago, and how AI legislation is developing today.
Lessons about artificial intelligence (AI), how our discourse about machines has gone awry, and how consulting traditional models can provide clarity — especially to thorny legal issues at the intersection of technology and IP law.
For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.
While change is a constant in the privacy, security and technology arena, 2025 is poised to be a landmark year. New technologies will continue to radiate through the economy — and our lives — while the new Trump Administration is likely to emphasize innovation over protection, reward maximization over risk minimization, and incentivizing over enforcing.
The most forward-thinking companies embrace AI with complete confidence because they have created governance programs that serve as guardrails for this incredible new technology. Effective governance ensures AI consistently aligns with an organization’s best interests, safeguarding against potential risks while unlocking its full potential.
A novel legal self-help technique to secure artificial intelligence data and programs is known as Poisoning AI. This technique involves modifying the AI algorithm to intentionally produce specific erroneous results.
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.
As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
