AI Law firm to pay $1 million to lawyer willing to argue Supreme Court case guided by their AI bot- Technology News, Firstpost

Mehul Reuben DasJan 09, 2023 15:26:45 IST

Imagine having a lawyer that is guided by artificial intelligence, to argue or case. Or, better yet, imagine having an AI chatbot, trained in all aspects of the law, as your advocate. DoNotPay, a legal services chatbot that was originally built to contest parking tickets is hoping that it makes some splash next month when it argues a case in a US court.

The law firm, DoNotPay, is actually just a chatbot and will be arguing a real case in a lower court next month. A lawyer or a person wearing a pair of AirPods will be told everything that needs to be said, and the lawyer just needs to repeat what they are told.

Not just that, the founder of DoNotPay, has also put up a rather unique challenge to lawyers practising in the US – let the case be argued by the chatbot, and the company will pay $1 million dollars.

DoNotPay will pay any lawyer or person $1,000,000 with an upcoming case in front of the United States Supreme Court to wear AirPods and let our robot lawyer argue the case by repeating exactly what it says. (1/2)

— Joshua Browder (@jbrowder1) January 9, 2023

Because programmes or AI bots can’t argue a case in front of a court in the US, or anywhere else for that matter mainly because of legal technicalities, DoNotPay will supply appropriate responses through an earpiece to the defendant, who can then use them in the courtroom.

Joshua Browder the founder of the company, wants to fight a case in the US Supreme Court, in a similar manner, through the means of a proxy. Browder’s idea is to have a lawyer wear a pair of AirPods and let his AI chatbot argue the case. What the proxy needs to do, is repeat exactly what the chatbot says.

Although no lawyer or litigant has taken up DoNotPay’s offer to argue a case in the US Supreme court, one of DoNotPay’s clients has enlisted the service in arguing a minor speeding ticket.

Founded in 2015, DoNotPay is an AI solution that is aimed at helping individuals fight against large organizations for acts such as applying wrong fees, persistent robocalling, or even fighting parking tickets. According to the company, most of these cases are winnable for individuals but appeals fall by the wayside since defendants cannot afford high legal fees or do not have the time and resources to fight bureaucracy.

We have upcoming cases in municipal (traffic) court next month. But the haters will say “traffic court is too simple for GPT.”

So we are making this serious offer, contingent on us coming to a formal agreement and all rules being followed.

Please contact me if interested!

— Joshua Browder (@jbrowder1) January 9, 2023

DoNotPay’s expertise goes above and beyond speeding tickets, and the program, which costs just $36 a year, could offer a very pocket-friendly option for those who want to put up a fight.

In the upcoming case that it will argue in February, the program will do all the data crunching from past cases to prepare the individual’s defence and even respond to the questions raised in court.

Since this is the AI chatbots’ very first case, DoNotPay is ready to take on the burden of punishment if the AI’s advice does not help the client. Since it is a speeding ticket, DoNotPay will pay for the speeding ticket. If it wins though, it will have a massive victory to its credit.

However, given the challenge that Browder has extended to lawyers or any person who are set to appear before the highest court in America, the firm is pretty confident in their abilities to argue and win a case, irrespective of the court that it is in. 

It should be noted that although the offer may have been made seriously, there is very little chance that any lawyer would accept it. Cases that are fought in front of the Supreme Court have massive ramifications, and no lawyer in their sound mind would risk any case with such stakes to an AI bot. 

More importantly, as several users pointed out, lawyers aren’t allowed to carry their smartphones and tablets into the main hall where cases are argued, so it would be downright impossible for the law firm to carry out what they plan.