Partner Jennifer Maisel was quoted in a Law360 article examining the efforts of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules to adopt two Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) for the Artificial Intelligence (AI) era: Proposed Rule 707 would require AI-generated evidence to meet the reliability standards that apply to expert testimony under Rule 702, and an addition to Rule 901 would create a framework for handling allegations of AI-fabricated evidence, or “deepfakes.”
Jen, who is part of Rothwell Figg’s team representing media organizations in copyright litigation against some of the world’s leading AI companies, spoke at the Committee’s recent meeting in Boston on Rule 707. The article spotlights Jennifer’s assessment of the practical burden the draft rule could place on litigants: “With the rule as written, we are going to be faced with a flood of potential discovery disputes,” Jennifer said at the symposium.
In a follow-up interview with Law360, Jennifer illustrated the concern with a hypothetical AI-generated report on a patent’s validity. She explained that parties could become locked in detailed discovery fights over the tools used to generate such a report, and potentially even “discovery disputes just around discoverability.” Those disputes, she said, could force courts to hold “mini-trials” focused solely on the scope of discovery.
The article, “Judiciary Stuck In AI Rulemaking Rut As Attys, Judges Protest,” is authored by Jeff Overley for Law360.
