Jerry Lawson explains why podcasts belong in every lawyer’s toolkit. Lawson states that podcasts have not only helped him professionally but also added some joy to his life. They offer a rare opportunity for busy lawyers the chance to learn and grow even while doing routine tasks. It’s learning that fits into your life, not the other way around. Lawson recommends number of legal centric as well as general interest podcasts.
AI in Law & Legal Tech Expert Nicole L. Black frames how AI is changing how legal work gets done, and the effects aren’t limited to law offices. Other legal organizations are equally impacted, including the courts. As judicial offices around the country grapple with the how and why of secure AI adoption, new rules, policies, and processes are being implemented to address the ethical and practical issues presented.
Stephen Embry writes about how much we might be losing when we let AI sanitize our word choices: the difference between good and memorable often comes down to a single word. For lawyers especially, professionals whose job is communication and persuasion, completely ceding editorial judgment to algorithms that prioritize blandness over impact is a mistake. Embry states – Words matter. Don’t let robots choose yours.
With ChatGPT, law-school instructor Sean Harrington is rebuilding student assessment for the AI era. Sean—who teaches students AI and law at the University of Oklahoma and holds both a JD and an MS in Data Analytics—saw a core problem the moment generative AI went mainstream: traditional take-home exams no longer reveal what students really know.
Jordan Furlong contends right now it’s possible for an ordinary person to obtain from an LLM like ChatGPT-5 the performance of a legal task — the provision of legal analysis, the production of a legal instrument, the delivery of legal advice — that previously could only be acquired from a human lawyer. He further states he’s not saying a person should do that. The LLM’s output might be effective and reliable, or it might prove disastrously off-base. But many people are already using LLMs in this way, and in the absence of other accessible options for legal assistance, they will continue to do so. Furlong offers insights into the challenges such a paradigm shift pose as well as the consequences of not meeting the moment as the velocity of AI’s adoption permeates the legal profession.
Jordan Furlong states that we all know lawyers’ commercial role, to be professional guides for human affairs. But he stresses we also need lawyers to bring the law’s guarantees to life for people and in society. And we need it right now.
Jordan Furlong’s article expands analysis on the already noted risks arising from lawyers using AI. Generative AI can be incredibly, and dangerously, sycophantic. This is particularly worrisome for lawyers, because if they lose intellectual skills, what will they left to offer people? Furlong notes that the similarities between lawyer thinking and AI “thinking” should be a cause for alarm within the legal profession.
Ransomware attacks are a growing threat, inflicting significant operational, financial, and reputational damage on organizations worldwide. With attackers exploiting information asymmetry, traditional game theory negotiation strategies are inadequate in minimizing these risks. This paper Jawad Ramal by explores how Algorithmic Game Theory (AGT) can strengthen an organization’s leverage in negotiations by creating adaptive, data-informed strategies tailored to an organization’s specific vulnerabilities and priorities. Organizations face unique challenges during ransomware negotiations, including the unpredictability of the attacker’s behavior, the evolving ransomware landscape, and the limited amounts of useful historical data. AGT addresses these challenges by integrating the organization’s unique data and enabling organizations to simulate potential negotiation outcomes, assess risks, and make informed decisions. Organizations with sufficient financial resources and computational power may be able to implement AGT modeling in-house. However, other organizations that lack these resources might find it more compelling to leverage third-party AGT providers or legal panels. These parties can manage AGT modeling, conduct tabletop exercises, and recommend organizational changes to improve ransomware preparedness. Additionally, AGT model outputs can empower organizations to negotiate more effectively with cyber insurance providers, shifting leverage by demonstrating preparedness and reducing perceived risk.
Law department innovation leaders operate at a demanding intersection. They must innovate in measurable ways. Yet, particularly in the current economic climate, this mandate collides head-on with intense budget scrutiny, hiring freezes, and an unrelenting demand for immediate, tangible returns. Big tech visions often yield to the urgent need for pragmatic cost control. So, how do we advance an innovation agenda in a way that is both impactful and financially defensible right now? Dennis Kennedy, Director, Center for Law, Technology & Innovation Michigan State University College of Law, advises that the most pragmatic, resilient, and successful innovation strategy for law departments today involves strategically targeting the vast, resource-intensive “middle ground” of legal work with AI.
Whether you’re writing briefs, litigating high-stakes matters, lobbying policymakers or just trying to future-proof a career, Jerry Lawson affirms that Susskind’s book on legal AI gives you enough clarity to steer rather than drift. And in the AI era, that might be the most practical gift of all.