4 ms·

There's no privilege, so yes, if the AI chats are retained, they may be subject to discovery.

• simianwords 1y ago
  even for say google search histories?
  • lima 1y ago
    Theoretically yes, if the court can be convinced that it is relevant to the case.
• 542354234235 1y ago
  This is completely wrong, as the other commenter stated. This would certainly fall under the work-product doctrine [1,2], where documents prepared for the purpose of future litigation are protected from discovery and could be considered analogous to attorney-client privilege (but is actually much more broadly defined than attorney-client privilege[4]). Even if opposing counsel is able to obtain discovery on a work-product, only fact based products, not opinion based are allowed. In other words, the court removes anything related to “mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of an attorney or other representative of a party concerning the litigation” [3]. For conversations with AI about how to conduct your case, that would exclude basically everything since it is an opinion work-product, not a fact work product. A fact based work-product would be things like “statements or interviews of now deceased witnesses, photographs or video of an accident scene taken at the time of the accident”[4]. [1] https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/the-work-product-privilege-in-a-nutshell/ https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/the-work-... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work-product_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work-product_doctrine [3] https://coxlawflorida.com/florida-rules-of-civil-procedure/rule-1-280-general-provisions-governing-discovery/ https://coxlawflorida.com/florida-rules-of-civil-procedure/r... [4] https://tenthings.blog/2019/06/05/ten-things-a-primer-on-the-work-product-privilege/ https://tenthings.blog/2019/06/05/ten-things-a-primer-on-the...
  • lima 1y ago
    Thank you