[Editor’s note: This is the second installment in a two-part series. In part 1, we discussed some key takeaways and impressions of the event. In part 2, we take a more granular look at some of the work and discussions that were shared. While the day was conducted under Chatham House Rule in order to spur open conversation, all individuals and organizations identified or quoted herein gave Legaltech News express permission to include them.]

When you get a group of generative AI legal leaders in one room, a lot of things can happen. In my experience, it’s most likely the usual canon in rotation: 1) Here are the theoretical use cases and dangers; 2) We’re doing great things, but we can’t talk about them; and 3) We plan to do great things, just don’t ask us to say what they are yet.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]