We
will
never
sell
or
share
your
information
without
your
consent.
See
our
privacy
policy.
(Photo
by
Denise
Truscello/Getty
Images
for
AD)
Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature
Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!
Which
song
off
of
Adele’s
25
album
did
Brazilian
judge
Victor
Torres
recently
find
plagiarized
Toninho
Geraes’s
“Mulheres”
(Women)?
The
judge
ordered
Sony
and
Universal
to
stop
“immediately
and
globally,
from
using,
reproducing,
editing,
distributing
or
commercializing
the
song[
],
by
any
modality,
means,
physical
or
digital
support,
streaming
or
sharing
platform.”
Hint:
Universal
Music
is
appealing
the
order,
saying
both
songs
use
a
musical
cliché
and
pointing
to
works
that
predate
Geraes’s
with
a
similar
melody.
See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.
Remember
the
childhood
game
of
“follow
the
leader”?
Are
we
still
doing
that
today?
What
is
leadership?
There
are
as
many
definitions
of
the
term
as
there
are
people
who
think
they
are
leaders.
Some
truly
are
leaders
and
some
are
just
kidding
themselves
(as
well
as
others).
Concepts
of
leadership
have
changed
over
the
decades,
and
that’s
a
good
thing.
We
have
come
a
long
way
from
the
previously
fashionable
style
of
“command
and
control.”
Where
once
a
CEO
such
as
Jack
Welch
at
General
Electric
was
vaunted
for
his
leadership,
that
was
the
same
Welch
who
reduced
the
bottom
20%
of
his
staff
every
year.
“Rank
and
yank”
it
was
called.
Now
there
are
revisionist
opinions
as
to
Welch’s
success.
Leadership
is
essential
to
being
a
good
lawyer
regardless
of
whether
you
are
a
sole
practitioner,
in
a
small
firm,
a
middling
size
firm,
or
one
of
those
behemoth
firms
that
are
gobbling
up
other
firms
(not
without
some
acid
reflux).
What
does
leadership
have
to
do
with
lawyering?
A
lot.
Regardless
of
your
position
in
a
firm,
be
it
junior
puppy,
senior
puppy,
partner
of
whatever
nature,
people
both
in
the
firm
and
out
regard
you
as
representing
that
firm,
be
it
with
clients,
opposing
counsel,
the
court,
and
(not
the
least),
the
people
you
work
with
on
a
daily
basis
—
your
teammates,
your
colleagues.
Leadership
can
run
the
gamut
from
representing
the
client
in
court,
heading
a
negotiation
team,
suggesting
how
to
strategize
litigation,
and
supervising
paralegals
and
other
support
staff.
Even
chairing
a
bar
association
committee,
giving
pro
bono
advice
to
a
nonprofit,
anything,
anywhere
can
be
viewed
as
leadership.
Others
may
not
regard
you
as
a
leader,
but
you
are.
(Even
though
“soft
skills”
are
still
underrated
as
leadership
qualities,
and
of
course
they
are
not
billing
machines.)
While
this
ATL
post
was
more
than
a
year
ago,
the
same
soft
skills
still
apply
today,
perhaps
even
more
so.
Two
of
them
are
leadership
and
a
sense
of
humor
(no
surprise
there
if
you
think
about
it.
Don’t
take
yourself
too
seriously.
Translation:
don’t
be
a
pompous
blowhard,
in
fact,
don’t
be
a
blowhard
at
all.
Even
popes
have
senses
of
humor.
Take
the
work
seriously,
but
taking
yourself
too
seriously,
not
having
a
sense
of
humor
about
the
million
and
one
things
that
can
(and
do)
go
wrong
every
day
in
the
practice
requires
that
we
be
able
to
laugh
about
our
foibles
and
the
foibles
of
others.
And
there’s
plenty
to
laugh
about.
Just
peruse
any
edition
of
ATL.
Example:
this
particular
judge
has
a
finely
honed
sense
of
the
ridiculous
(which
is
also
necessary,
especially
in
motion
practice).
Plaintiff’s
counsel
conditioned
defendant
counsel’s
request
for
an
extension
of
time
on
not
filing
a
motion
to
dismiss.
(Really?
Any
sense
of
humor
there?)
The
court
had
the
final
word
(it
always
does)
by
ordering
counsel
to
have
lunch
together
by
year’s
end
and
to
then
advise
the
court
about
their
conversation.
A
benchslap
of
a
different
variety
that
holds
great
promise
in
litigation
disputes.
Definitely
a
leader
in
dispute
resolution.
All
judicial
officers
should
consider
this
technique
and
warring
counsel
should
as
well.
Breaking
bread
together
may
not
lead
to
ultimate
resolution,
but
it
is
hard
to
be
pissed
off
when
your
mouth
is
full
of
an
expensive
meal
for
which
opposing
counsel
pays.
Yes,
lest
we
forget,
civility
is
also
another
component
of
leadership
and
another
required
MCLE
course
for
California
lawyers.
Leadership
is
also
emotional
intelligence,
authority
and
vulnerability.
I
like
the
definition
of
leadership
described
in
one
of
Louise
Penny’s
mysteries.
The
protagonist,
Inspector
Gamache
of
the
Sûreté
du
Québec,
says
that
leadership
has
four
elements:
“I’m
sorry.
I
was
wrong,
I
need
help.
I
don’t
know.”
Short
and
sweet,
right?
How
many
of
us
apologize
without
fear
of
potential
malpractice?
Very
few,
I
guess.
How
many
of
us
say
that
we
were
wrong?
Ditto,
for
the
same
reason.
How
many
of
us
ask
for
help?
How
many
of
us
have
the
courage
to
say
“I
don’t
know?”
If
leadership
is
the
ability
to
be
humble,
to
acknowledge
our
failings,
then
how
many
of
us
would
pass
that
test?
We
would
all
be
advised
to
STFU.
We
don’t
know
everything,
we
can’t
know
everything.
AI
doesn’t
know
everything
at
least,
not
yet.
And
I
don’t
think
that
AI
will
ever
provide
leadership.
Hopefully
that
will
always
be
a
human
need.
Jill
Switzer
has
been
an
active
member
of
the
State
Bar
of
California
for
over
40
years.
She
remembers
practicing
law
in
a
kinder,
gentler
time.
She’s
had
a
diverse
legal
career,
including
stints
as
a
deputy
district
attorney,
a
solo
practice,
and
several
senior
in-house
gigs.
She
now
mediates
full-time,
which
gives
her
the
opportunity
to
see
dinosaurs,
millennials,
and
those
in-between
interact
—
it’s
not
always
civil.
You
can
reach
her
by
email
at
[email protected].
Saying
there
is
a
critical
need
for
changes
to
the
ethics
rule,
the
Association
of
Professional
Responsibility
Lawyers
has
submitted
a
letter
to
the
president
of
the
American
Bar
Association
urging
significant
revisions
to
Model
Rule
5.4,
the
long-standing
prohibition
on
lawyers
sharing
fees
with
non-lawyers.
The
Dec.
12
letter
conveys
a
report
written
by
APRL’s
Future
of
Lawyering
Subcommittee
which
calls
for
reforms
to
accommodate
the
evolving
legal
market
while
maintaining
ethical
safeguards
that
protect
clients.
The
letter
was
sent
to
ABA
President
William
R.
Bay
by
San
Francisco
lawyer
Kendra
L.
Basner,
APRL’s
current
president.
In
the
report,
APRL,
a
national
organization
of
over
450
legal
professionals
focused
on
ethics
and
professional
responsibility,
argues
that
the
existing
rule
hinders
innovation
and
restricts
access
to
justice.
Its
proposed
revisions
aim
to
strike
a
balance
between
enabling
lawyers
to
collaborate
with
non-lawyers
and
ensuring
professional
independence.
“We
face
a
new
set
of
challenges
that
require
a
different
approach,”
Basner
wrote
in
her
letter,
quoting
Bay’s
own
statement,
delivered
during
the
2024
ABA
annual
meeting,
on
the
legal
profession’s
need
for
change.
“APRL
believes
that
there
is
a
critical
need
for
changes
to
this
ethics
rule
to
address
the
continued,
inevitable
involvement
of
non-lawyers
in
legal
delivery
systems
while
maintaining
regulations
that
protect
consumers,”
Basner
wrote.
APRL’s
proposed
revisions
to
Rule
5.4
would
allow
lawyers
to
share
fees
with
non-lawyers
under
specific
conditions.
They
include:
The
APRL
report
acknowledges
developments
regarding
the
regulation
and
licensing
of
alternative
business
structures
in
Arizona,
Utah
and
Washington,
which
have
tested
similar
reforms
with
promising
results.
APRL
says
its
proposal
provides
flexibility
for
states
to
adopt
jurisdiction-specific
registration
requirements.
The
ban
on
sharing
fees
with
non-lawyers,
enshrined
in
the
ABA’s
Model
Rule
5.4
since
1983,
was
originally
intended
to
protect
lawyer
independence.
However,
APRL’s
report
traces
the
rule’s
roots
to
outdated
concerns
over
unauthorized
practice
of
law
and
economic
competition
dating
back
to
the
19th
century.
Despite
the
persistence
of
Rule
5.4,
exceptions
to
it
already
exist,
the
report
notes,
such
as
profit-sharing
with
non-lawyer
employees
and
fee-sharing
with
nonprofits
Critics
of
the
prohibition
argue
that
it
stifles
innovation
in
legal
service
delivery.
APRL
cites
examples
like
the
now-defunct
Avvo
Legal
Services
platform,
which
state
bar
ethics
opinions
condemned
under
fee-sharing
restrictions
despite
the
platform’s
success
in
connecting
consumers
with
affordable
lawyers.
“These
ethics
opinions
relied
primarily
on
the
theory
that
by
sharing
fees
with
a
nonlawyer
(Avvo),
the
arrangement
jeopardized
the
lawyers’
ability
to
exercise
their
independent
professional
judgment
in
advising
and
representing
their
clients,”
the
report
says.
“No
known
data
supports
this
assumption.”
APRL’s
report
points
to
jurisdictions
that
have
relaxed
fee-sharing
restrictions
without
experiencing
adverse
effects.
Key
examples
include:
“Defenders
of
Rule
5.4
restrictions
tend
to
approach
the
rule
from
a
perspective
that
the
rule
is
so
critical
that
any
relaxation
of
the
rule
will
be
catastrophic,
that
the
sky
will
surely
fall
and
repercussions
of
sharing
fees
with
nonlawyers
will
be
impossible
to
control,”
the
report
says.
“A
review
of
the
jurisdictions
that
have
experimented
with
nonlawyer
fee
sharing
reveals
no
such
doomsday
scenario.”
Access
to
Justice
and
Innovation
APRL
emphasizes
the
potential
benefits
of
its
proposal
for
consumers
and
the
legal
profession.
By
enabling
lawyers
to
collaborate
with
non-lawyers
—
including
technology
experts,
marketers,
and
financial
specialists
—
law
firms
could
deliver
services
more
efficiently
and
affordably.
Innovations
like
subscription-based
legal
services,
AI-powered
legal
tools,
and
tech-driven
platforms
could
address
gaps
in
access
to
justice.
“A
significant
disconnect
exists
in
the
United
States
between
people
needing
legal
assistance
and
the
availability
or
affordability
of
lawyers,”
the
report
says,
underscoring
the
opportunity
to
better
serve
underserved
communities.
While
APRL’s
proposal
aligns
with
successful
experiments
in
several
jurisdictions,
the
ABA
has
historically
resisted
changes
to
Rule
5.4.
The
association
reaffirmed
its
support
for
the
prohibition
in
2022
through
Resolution
402,
which
took
the
position
that
innovation
can
occur
without
changing
the
prohibition
on
fee
sharing
by
lawyers.
Nevertheless,
in
this
letter
to
Bay
and
the
accompanying
report,
APRL
encourages
the
ABA
and
state
regulators
to
reconsider
their
positions
and
embrace
reforms
that
align
with
the
modern
legal
marketplace.
“APRL
encourages
the
ABA
to
lead,
rather
than
obstruct,
significant
regulatory
reform
that
will
benefit
both
lawyers
and
consumers
of
legal
services,
and
importantly,
do
no
harm,”
APRL’s
report
concludes.
In
her
letter,
Basner
said
that
APRL
hopes
to
garner
support
for
its
proposal
not
only
by
the
ABA
but
also
by
individual
U.S.
jurisdictions
willing
to
consider
changes
to
their
own
versions
of
the
rule.
“Whether
the
ABA
will
be
as
receptive
to
a
clarion
call
for
change
does
not
alter
the
fact
that
change
is
needed,”
the
report
says.
Imagine
a
time
when
legal
discovery
meant
sifting
through
thousands
of
paper
documents
in
a
dimly
lit
basement,
armed
with
nothing
more
than
a
highlighter
and
a
stack
of
Post-its.
Now,
picture
that
world
being
turned
upside
down
by
a
digital
revolution
that
would
forever
change
the
way
law
is
practiced.
Marla
Crawford,
general
counsel
at
Simplify,
was
not
just
a
witness
to
this
transformation;
she
was
a
key
player
in
it.
As
one
of
the
first
lawyers
to
specialize
in
e-discovery
during
the
landmark
Enron
case,
Marla
experienced
the
seismic
shift
from
manual
document
review
to
the
digital
age
of
legal
technology.
Her
journey
is
a
testament
to
the
power
of
embracing
change,
taking
risks,
and
leveraging
technology
to
stay
ahead
in
a
constantly
evolving
field.
From
the
early
days
of
e-discovery
to
the
current
wave
of
AI
innovation,
Marla
has
been
at
the
forefront,
shaping
and
adapting
to
every
new
development.
How
did
she
navigate
these
uncharted
waters,
and
what
can
her
experience
teach
us
about
the
future
of
legal
practice
in
the
age
of
technology?
Let’s
dive
into
Marla’s
story
to
explore
the
past,
present,
and
future
of
legal
technology.
From
Paper
To
Pixels:
The
Dawn
Of
E-Discovery
Marla’s
career
began
in
Biglaw
in
the
late
1980s,
a
time
when
legal
discovery
was
a
manual,
labor-intensive
process.
Lawyers
would
often
find
themselves
in
basement
rooms,
surrounded
by
towering
boxes
of
documents,
painstakingly
sifting
through
files
to
find
the
crucial
piece
of
evidence
that
could
make
or
break
a
case.
This
was
the
norm
until
the
late
1990s
when
the
Enron
scandal
erupted,
catapulting
e-discovery
into
the
spotlight.
“I
was
literally
in
the
room
when
we
built
the
first
systems
to
review
emails,”
Marla
recalls.
“We
had
to
innovate
on
the
fly,
using
technology
that
was
never
designed
for
legal
discovery,
to
handle
the
massive
amounts
of
data.”
This
experience
not
only
defined
her
career
but
also
positioned
her
as
a
pioneer
in
the
field
of
e-discovery.
The
Enron
case,
with
its
600,000
emails,
was
a
watershed
moment.
It
demonstrated
the
power
of
digital
tools
in
managing
data
that
would
have
been
impossible
to
handle
manually.
The
Challenges
And
Opportunities
Of
Being
First
Embracing
e-discovery
was
not
without
its
challenges.
“Many
of
my
peers
didn’t
see
the
potential
in
this
new
area,”
Marla
explains.
“They
viewed
it
as
grunt
work,
something
that
wasn’t
‘real’
law.”
However,
Marla
saw
it
differently.
She
recognized
early
on
that
technology
would
transform
the
legal
landscape,
creating
opportunities
for
those
willing
to
adapt.
Her
willingness
to
dive
into
the
less
glamorous
aspects
of
legal
work
—
like
sifting
through
data
—
ultimately
paid
off,
setting
her
apart
from
her
peers
and
positioning
her
as
a
leader
in
legal
tech.
For
Marla,
the
decision
to
specialize
in
e-discovery
was
partly
practical.
As
a
young
lawyer
and
a
mother,
she
found
that
focusing
on
this
emerging
area
allowed
her
to
balance
her
professional
and
personal
life
more
effectively.
Unlike
her
colleagues
who
traveled
frequently
for
trials,
Marla
could
remain
involved
in
high-profile
cases
without
leaving
the
office.
This
decision,
driven
by
both
career
strategy
and
lifestyle
needs,
turned
out
to
be
a
defining
move
that
aligned
with
the
technological
evolution
of
the
legal
field.
Navigating
The
Technological
Revolution:
The
Role
Of
Service
Providers
As
technology
became
more
integral
to
the
practice
of
law,
the
landscape
of
legal
services
began
to
change
dramatically.
Law
firms,
once
the
unchallenged
gatekeepers
of
legal
knowledge
and
expertise,
found
themselves
sharing
the
stage
with
a
new
set
of
players:
legal
service
providers.
These
companies
brought
with
them
a
range
of
professionals
—
from
technologists
and
data
scientists
to
business
strategists
—
whose
skills
were
increasingly
essential
to
managing
complex
legal
workflows.
“The
introduction
of
service
providers
into
the
legal
ecosystem
has
fundamentally
changed
the
profession,”
Marla
notes.
“We’re
no
longer
just
lawyers;
we’re
part
of
a
broader
team
that
includes
people
with
diverse
skills
and
backgrounds.
This
shift
has
made
the
practice
of
law
more
dynamic
and,
frankly,
more
exciting.”
However,
this
shift
also
brought
challenges.
Lawyers
had
to
learn
to
collaborate
with
nonlawyers,
including
technologists
who
spoke
a
different
language
and
approached
problems
from
different
angles.
This
was
not
always
an
easy
transition.
“There
was
a
lot
of
resistance
at
first,”
Marla
recalls.
“Many
lawyers
were
used
to
being
the
sole
experts
in
the
room,
and
suddenly
they
had
to
share
that
space
with
others
who
brought
different
expertise
to
the
table.”
Harnessing
The
Power
Of
Technology
In
Legal
Practice
Today,
Marla
continues
to
work
at
the
intersection
of
law
and
technology
as
the
general
counsel
of
Simplify,
a
leading
legal
technology
services
provider.
In
this
role,
she
wears
many
hats
—
not
only
providing
legal
advice
but
also
collaborating
closely
with
the
company’s
tech
development
teams
to
shape
products
that
better
serve
their
clients.
“What’s
exciting
about
being
at
Simplify
is
that
I
get
to
look
at
our
technology
from
a
user’s
perspective,”
Marla
explains.
“I
can
provide
feedback
on
what
would
have
been
useful
when
I
was
in-house,
and
help
develop
solutions
that
make
the
lives
of
legal
professionals
easier
and
more
efficient.”
This
dual
role
allows
Marla
to
bridge
the
gap
between
legal
practice
and
technological
innovation,
ensuring
that
the
tools
developed
are
truly
user-centric
and
effective.
Looking
Ahead:
The
Future
Of
Legal
Technology
And
Inclusion
Marla’s
career
reflects
a
broader
trend
in
the
legal
industry
toward
greater
integration
of
technology
and
the
diversification
of
skills
within
legal
teams.
As
artificial
intelligence
and
machine
learning
continue
to
advance,
the
legal
profession
is
poised
for
another
wave
of
transformation.
Marla
believes
that
embracing
these
changes
will
not
only
improve
efficiency
but
also
enhance
the
quality
of
legal
services
by
allowing
lawyers
to
focus
more
on
strategy
and
less
on
repetitive
tasks.
Moreover,
Marla
is
passionate
about
fostering
diversity
and
inclusion
within
the
legal
tech
space.
She
is
a
strong
advocate
for
initiatives
like
the
SPLASH
Pledge,
which
aims
to
combat
sexual
harassment
in
the
industry
and
create
safer,
more
inclusive
environments
for
all
professionals.
“It’s
crucial
that
we
make
the
legal
profession
more
welcoming
and
supportive,”
she
says.
“Diversity
isn’t
just
a
buzzword
—
it’s
about
bringing
different
perspectives
to
the
table,
which
ultimately
leads
to
better
outcomes
for
everyone.”
Embracing
Change
And
Leading
The
Way
Marla’s
story
is
a
powerful
reminder
of
the
importance
of
embracing
change
and
using
it
as
a
catalyst
for
growth.
Her
willingness
to
step
into
new
and
uncharted
territories
has
not
only
defined
her
career
but
has
also
helped
shape
the
evolution
of
legal
technology.
For
legal
professionals
at
all
stages
of
their
careers,
Marla’s
journey
offers
valuable
lessons:
stay
curious,
be
adaptable,
and
never
underestimate
the
value
of
being
the
first
to
step
into
a
new
space.
As
the
legal
field
continues
to
evolve,
those
who
are
willing
to
embrace
new
technologies
and
diverse
teams
will
be
best
positioned
to
lead.
Marla
Crawford’s
career
is
proof
that
the
intersection
of
law
and
technology
is
not
just
a
place
of
innovation,
but
also
one
of
opportunity
for
those
ready
to
seize
it.
Olga
V.
Mack
is
a
Fellow
at
CodeX,
The
Stanford
Center
for
Legal
Informatics,
and
a
Generative
AI
Editor
at
law.MIT.
Olga
embraces
legal
innovation
and
had
dedicated
her
career
to
improving
and
shaping
the
future
of
law.
She
is
convinced
that
the
legal
profession
will
emerge
even
stronger,
more
resilient,
and
more
inclusive
than
before
by
embracing
technology.
Olga
is
also
an
award-winning
general
counsel,
operations
professional,
startup
advisor,
public
speaker,
adjunct
professor,
and
entrepreneur.
She
authored Get
on
Board:
Earning
Your
Ticket
to
a
Corporate
Board
Seat, Fundamentals
of
Smart
Contract
Security,
and Blockchain
Value:
Transforming
Business
Models,
Society,
and
Communities. She
is
working
on
three
books:
Visual
IQ
for
Lawyers
(ABA
2024), The
Rise
of
Product
Lawyers:
An
Analytical
Framework
to
Systematically
Advise
Your
Clients
Throughout
the
Product
Lifecycle
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024),
and
Legal
Operations
in
the
Age
of
AI
and
Data
(Globe
Law
and
Business
2024).
You
can
follow
Olga
on
LinkedIn
and
Twitter
@olgavmack.
There
are
many
different
and
exciting
ways
to
rank
law
firms.
How
prestigious
are
they?
How
much
money
are
they
making?
How
much
take-home
cash
do
partners
earn?
How
big
are
they?
Yes,
size
continues
to
matter
when
it
comes
to
Biglaw,
and
thankfully,
the
Legal
Intelligencer
recently
unleashed
its
annual
PA
Law
100,
a
ranking
of
the
largest
law
firms
in
Pennsylvania
covering
the
previous
calendar
year.
If
you’ve
ever
wondered
about
headcounts,
this
is
the
ranking
for
you.
The
top
10
biggest
firms
(numbers
show
attorneys
in
PA)
are
not
surprising
for
those
who
practice
in
the
region.
Let’s
take
a
moment
to
gawk
at
the
Keystone
State’s
Biglaw
behemoths:
- Cozen
O’Connor:
296- Reed
Smith:
284- Morgan
Lewis
&
Bockius:
280- Fox
Rothschild:
241- Buchanan
Ingersoll
&
Rooney:
234- Marshall
Dennehey:
229- Duane
Morris:
216- Blank
Rome:
197- Troutman
Pepper
Hamilton
Sanders:
190- Eckert
Seamans
Cherin
&
Mellott:
181
Congratulations
to
Cozen
for
employing
more
lawyers
in
Pennsylvania
than
any
other
firm.
This
firm
wins
the
award
for
putting
the
“big”
in
Biglaw
in
the
Birthplace
of
America.
Head
to
the
Legal
Intelligencer
if
you’re
curious
about
the
firms
ranked
16-100.
The
2024
Pa
Law
100
[Legal
Intelligencer]
Pa
100:
Largest
Law
Firms
[Legal
Intelligencer]
Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on Bluesky, X/Twitter,
and Threads, or
connect
with
her
on LinkedIn.
The
profession
that
can’t
figure
out
how
to
avoid
citing
fake
cases
from
artificial
intelligence
will
soon
deal
with
a
technology
far
more
revolutionary.
This
month,
Google
unveiled
its
new
Willow
chip,
heralding
a
significant
leap
in
quantum
computing.
Dare
we
say
a
Quantum
Leap?
No,
we
dare
not.
Still,
this
is
a
science
that
confused
the
hell
out
of
Einstein
so
we
just
can’t
wait
to
see
how
lawyers
screw
this
one
up!
Quantum
computing
replacing
binary
ones-and-zeroes
computing
with
qubits
that
can
simultaneously
behave
as
ones
and
zeroes.
It’s
the
technological
equivalent
of
being
able
to
answer
“it
depends”
and
we
all
know
how
important
that
is
for
legal
reasoning.
Being
able
to
use
a
qubit
to
exist
as
0-0,
0-1,
1-1,
and
1-0
all
at
the
same
time
opens
the
door
to
an
exponential
explosion
in
computing
power
as
qubits
are
stacked
atop
each
other.
Google’s
announcement
claimed
that
Willow
took
5
minutes
to
complete
a
computation
that
today’s
fastest
supercomputer
would
crack
in
10
septillion
years.
Let’s
round
it
up
to
6
minutes
and
bill
it
as
“0.1
—
further
work.”
That’s
why
it
feels
like
the
next
big
thing
for
the
profession
—
starting
as
early
as
2025
—
will
be
quantum
computing.
Generative
AI
enjoyed
a
couple
years
in
the
spotlight
and
we
all
had
a
lot
of
fun.
It
drove
every
legal
technology
conversation
as
we
aired
all
our
daydreams
about
AI’s
potential
to
radically
alter
the
profession.
Even
though
its
current,
far
from
“smart”
iteration
is
likely
as
good
as
it
gets,
it’s
still
a
powerful
tool
for
automating
rote
tasks
and
big
data
crunching
—
abilities
that
could
end
the
stranglehold
of
the
billable
hour
(video).
But
it’s
not
a
robot
lawyer
and
won’t
be
without
revolutions
in
other
fields
of
tech.
However,
quantum
computing
could
go
a
long
way
toward
accelerating
AI.
Even
without
harnessing
dilithium
crystals
to
provide
the
levels
of
power
needed
to
move
AI
beyond
its
“glorified
Clippy”
stage,
quantum
computing
can
supercharge
the
algorithms
behind
AI
tech.
As
Foreign
Policy
columnist
Vivek
Wadhwa
and
director
of
the
Stanford
Center
for
Responsible
Quantum
Technology
Mauritz
Kop
noted
in
2022,
“artificial
intelligence
is
as
self-aware
as
a
paper
clip”
but
quantum
computing
could
allow
large
language
models
to
utilize
exponentially
more
parameters
and
learn
it
all
faster
and
using
less
energy.
That
said,
the
impact
this
technology
has
on
lawyers
will
be
felt
more
in
cybersecurity
than
AI.
Cybersecurity
was
already
set
to
be
a
hot
topic
for
lawyers
in
2025
with
a
new
administration
committed
to
starting
a
trade
war
with
America’s
most
technologically
advanced
adversaries
while
simultaneously
threatening
to
walk
away
from
global
cyber
commitments,
slash
funding
for
the
Cybersecurity
and
Infrastructure
Security
Agency,
and
place
Homeland
Security
under
the
stewardship
of
the
only
governor
who
turned
down
free
cybersecurity
money.
But
she
can
protect
America
from
adorable
puppies,
so
there’s
that.
As
if
the
U.S.
—
and
by
extension,
the
Western
corporate
world
—
wasn’t
exposed
enough,
advances
in
quantum
computing
would
allow
hackers
to
brute
force
blow
through
existing
security
protocols.
Eventually,
quantum
computing
will
also
allow
unbreakable
security
when
the
tech
creates
ever
changing
and
improbably
dense
encryptions
to
stay
ahead.
Unfortunately,
the
damage
may
already
be
done
without
you
knowing
it.
Hacking
entities
are
suspected
of
engaging
in
“hack
now,
decrypt
later”
tactics,
gathering
well-secured
data
now
in
the
hope
of
cracking
it
open
once
burgeoning
technology
delivers
that
power.
Law
firms
have
long
been
viewed
as
a
soft
underbelly
of
security
—
see
Panama
Papers
—
but
quantum
computing
risks
turning
even
the
most
responsible
firms
into
targets
when
today’s
top-of-the-line
security
is
able
to
be
cracked
within
minutes.
Beyond
data
privacy,
quantum
computing
opens
a
can
of
intellectual
property
worms:
The
rapid
processing
speed
of
quantum
computers
could
facilitate
the
infringement
of
intellectual
property
rights
by
allowing
the
copying
and
modification
of
large
amounts
of
data
almost
instantaneously.
Lawyers
must
be
alert
to
the
evolution
of
intellectual
property
laws
and
work
on
new
legal
strategies
to
protect
their
clients’
rights
in
this
new
technological
environment.
And
if
you
thought
the
ownership
of
a
code
only
prompted
by
a
human
but
created
by
existing
AI
raised
IP
concerns,
wait
until
a
quantum-powered
algorithm
is
inventing
new
pharmaceuticals.
Kop
sees
an
urgent
need
for
drafting
legal
and
regulatory
frameworks
before
this
technology
is
fully
realized…
which
isn’t
that
far
off:
And
many
of
the perils
and
risks are
unknown
because
they
are
beyond
our
current
imagination.
Breaking
cryptography
and
classical
data
security,
that’s
the
one
“use
case”
people
are
most
afraid
of
right
now.
We
call
that
“Q-Day”,
the
day
when
quantum
computers
suddenly
break
the
Internet.
And
we
are
looking
at
a
time
frame
of
just
three
years
for
that,
so
there
is
tremendous
urgency
here
to
get
things
right,
both
on
the
software
and
hardware
side
of
things.
And
then
there
are
huge
risks
associated
with
authoritarianism
and
state
surveillance,
because
quantum
is
ubiquitous
and
potentially
dual
use.
Quantum
Artificial
Intelligence
(QAI)
will
be
like
AI
on
steroids.
It’s
a dictator’s
dream.
“Three
years,”
“break
the
internet,”
and
“dictator’s
dream”
amount
to
a
troubling
game
of
Mad
Libs.
Kop
said
that
in
April
when
quantum
computing
was
still
held
in
check.
Google’s
saying
it’s
gotten
quantum
errors
—
the
drift
into
wrongness
that
can
happen
as
all
this
spooky
action
heaps
upon
itself
—
below
threshold,
meaning
the
more
qubits
they’re
adding,
the
fewer
errors
they’re
getting.
Will
2025
be
the
year
of
quantum?
It
might
still
be
slightly
early.
But
Kop’s
warning
that
legal
needs
to
get
on
top
of
this
technology
before
it
reaches
full
realization
means
2025
should
be
the
year
of
quantum
for
the
legal
industry.
Earlier:
For
The
Love
Of
All
That
Is
Holy,
Stop
Blaming
ChatGPT
For
This
Bad
Brief
Generative
AI…
What
If
This
Is
As
Good
As
It
Gets?
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter or
Bluesky
if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
The
firms
in
the
Am
Law
100
may
have
large
headcounts,
but
the
only
numbers
that
really
matter
are
on
your
check!
There
are
some
great
boutiques
out
there
shelling
out
Biglaw
money,
and
Hueston
Hennigan
is
one
of
’em!
The
trial
boutique
awarded
all
bonus-eligible
associates
a
higher-than-market
bonus,
with
some
associates
receiving
two
to
three
times
the
market
bonus
for
their
class!
Here’s
the
market
scale
for
context:
The
Southern
California-based
law
firm
is
making
a
name
for
itself
by
earning
massive
wins
for
their
clients
and
passing
the
good
fortune
on
to
their
employees.
We
like
hearing
about
bonuses
almost
as
much
as
you
enjoy
spending
them.
As
soon
as
your
firm’s
memo
comes
out,
please
email
it
to
us
(subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus”)
or
text
us
(646-820-8477).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.
And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Salary
&
Bonus
Alerts,
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.
Chris
Williams
became
a
social
media
manager
and
assistant
editor
for
Above
the
Law
in
June
2021.
Prior
to
joining
the
staff,
he
moonlighted
as
a
minor
Memelord™
in
the
Facebook
group Law
School
Memes
for
Edgy
T14s.
He
endured
Missouri
long
enough
to
graduate
from
Washington
University
in
St.
Louis
School
of
Law.
He
is
a
former
boatbuilder
who
cannot
swim, a
published
author
on
critical
race
theory,
philosophy,
and
humor,
and
has
a
love
for
cycling
that
occasionally
annoys
his
peers.
You
can
reach
him
by
email
at [email protected] and
by
tweet
at @WritesForRent.
Generative
AI
is
revolutionizing
the
legal
industry
by
driving
critical
efficiencies
in
long-established
processes.
Doing
more
with
less
has
historically
been
a
challenge
for
in-house
counsel,
and
teams
are
eager
for
new
solutions,
particularly
in
e-discovery.
As
documented
in
a
new
IDC
Research
Study
commissioned
by
Relativity,
Generative
AI
in
Legal
2024,
50%
of
respondents
have
reported
that
their
AI
use
has
increased
over
the
past
two
years
and
respondents
reported
that
48%
of
their
day-to-day
AI
use
involves
generative
AI.
Knowing
where
to
start
with
generative
AI
can
feel
overwhelming,
especially
with
so
many
potential
applications.
To
help
narrow
the
options
and
derive
the
greatest
value,
in-house
teams
need
to
prioritize
solutions
that
will
have
the
most
impact
on
how
they
work.
For
teams
ready
to
apply
generative
AI
directly
to
e-discovery,
first-pass
review
has
proven
a
great
area
to
start.
Why
First-Pass
Review
During
a
recent
industry
event,
in-house
e-discovery
leaders
highlighted
three
key
reasons
for
why
first-pass
review
is
an
ideal
starting
place:
In
the
end,
experimentation
is
key
to
learning
quickly
and
getting
the
most
out
of
generative
AI-
powered
solutions.
From
automating
routine
tasks
to
taking
on
parts
of
the
EDRM,
continuous
testing
and
refinement
finding
will
help
you
find
the
most
effective
use
case
for
your
organization.
Trust
But
Verify
As
with
any
new
technology
or
process
change,
corporate
legal
teams
should
approach
generative
AI
with
the
same
caution,
identifying
inherent
risks
and
verifying
outputs.
When
evaluating
the
results
of
generative
AI,
teams
can
depend
on
the
same
best
practice
metrics
used
in
e-discovery
for
the
last
20
years:
recall,
precision,
elusion
rate
and
more.
By
adhering
to
these
metrics
for
accuracy,
teams
can
easily
gauge
the
performance
of
their
prompt
input
and
compare
results
to
current
workflows.
Generative
AI
does
introduce
new
types
of
risks,
but
these
risks
can
be
mitigated
with
appropriate
technology
parameters.
For
example,
Relativity
addresses
the
risk
of
hallucinations
through
a
chain-of-thought
approach,
requiring
that
generative
AI
validate
its
citations
in
the
source
document
it
is
analyzing.
When
it
comes
to
security
and
privacy
with
generative
AI,
organizations
need
to
deploy
strategies
to
prevent
employee
misuse.
Public
models
like
ChatGPT
are
constantly
learning,
and
employees
can
easily
input
proprietary
data
into
prompts
that
become
part
of
the
training
data
set
for
future
outputs.
Relativity
At
Relativity,
generative
AI
solutions
are
built
with
privacy
and
security
at
their
core
using
a
secure
integration
with
Microsoft
Azure’s
OpenAI
services.
All
data
input
into
Relativity
aiR
for
Review
stays
within
the
confines
of
RelativityOne,
and
no
data
is
stored
or
retained
by
Azure
OpenAI.
Additionally,
all
AI
innovation
rests
upon
Relativity’s
AI
Principles,
which
guide
our
everyday
decision-making
to
ensure
we’re
creating
technology
that’s
clear,
fair,
and
gives
our
customers
the
utmost
control.
Starting
your
Journey
Like
any
journey,
the
beginning
is
the
hardest
part.
Here
are
some
tips
to
get
started:
The
next
step
to
implementing
generative
AI
into
your
e-discovery
workflows
is
simple:
set
up
time
with
the
Relativity
team
to
find
the
right
solution
or
partner
for
your
business.
Ed.
note:
This
is
the
latest
installment
in
a
series
of
posts
on
motherhood
in
the
legal
profession,
in
partnership
with
our
friends
at MothersEsquire.
Welcome
Susan
Peters
to
our
pages.
Click
here
if
you’d
like
to
donate
to
MothersEsquire.
You
worked
incredibly
hard
to
get
to
this
place
professionally
and
develop
your
skills.
For
2025,
make
it
a
priority
to
raise
your
profile
and
get
more
work
that
you
want!
As
a
former
litigator
turned
public
relations
and
communications
professional,
my
advice
is
to
promote
yourself
at
all
stages
of
your
career,
whether
you
are
a
brand-new
lawyer
or
have
been
practicing
for
a
while.
Profile
raising
is
key
for
lawyers
looking
to
cement
long-term
success,
build
influence,
and
position
themselves
as
leaders
in
their
field.
Lawyers,
especially
busy
mother
attorneys
ask
me
all
the
time:
Why
should
I
care
about
self-promotion?
Why
do
this
with
what
little
free
time
I
have?
Isn’t
my
work
product
good
enough?
Sadly,
the
answer
is
no
—
profile
raising
is
crucial
for
women
for
many
reasons.
There
is
a
huge
gender
gap
in
self-promotion,
which
incredibly
begins
as
early
as
sixth
grade,
and
a
study
finds
that
female
workers’
deep
discomfort
over
touting
their
skills
and
experience
adds
to
gender
gap
in
promotions
and
pay.
We
have
to
fix
this!
Why
Should
I
Promote
Myself?
Some
Key
Considerations
Lawyers
with
strong,
visible
profiles
are
more
likely
to
attract
new
clients.
A
well-established
public
presence
signals
expertise
and
trustworthiness,
making
clients
more
comfortable
in
choosing
them
for
legal
representation.
Profile
raising
helps
lawyers
manage
and
shape
their
public
image.
By
actively
engaging
in
thought
leadership,
commenting
on
newsworthy
topics,
social
media,
or
public
speaking,
lawyers
control
how
they
are
perceived
by
the
public,
peers
and
clients.
In
a
crowded
legal
market,
raising
your
profile
distinguishes
you
and
sets
you
apart
from
the
competition.
Being
known
for
a
particular
expertise
or
leadership
in
the
industry
often
gives
you
a
competitive
edge
in
securing
high-profile
cases
and
clients.
Additionally,
a
well-known
lawyer
can
leverage
their
public
profile
to
build
a
wider
network
of
peers,
clients
and
industry
contacts.
These
relationships
can
lead
to
collaborations,
referrals
and
new
business
opportunities.
A
strong
profile
also
makes
lawyers
attractive
for
media
interviews
(the
fun
stuff!)
and
speaking
engagements.
This
helps
further
elevate
your
status
as
a
thought
leader.
Lastly,
lawyers
with
elevated
profiles
are
more
likely
to
receive
referrals
from
colleagues,
clients,
and
other
industry
professionals
who
recognize
their
expertise
and
trust
their
reputation.
Some
Suggested
Tactics
On
How
To
Do
It
I
am
often
asked
what
are
the
most
effective
ways
to
raise
my
profile
with
the
least
amount
of
time
and
effort.
While
everyone
is
different
and
excels
in
different
areas,
some
of
my
top
suggestions:
Thought
Leadership
and
Content
Creation
One
of
the
most
impactful
ways
to
raise
your
profile
is
through
thought
leadership.
Writing
articles,
blogs,
or
op-eds
on
topics
relevant
to
your
practice
areas
allows
you
to
showcase
your
expertise
and
become
a
go-to
source
for
the
media.
Publishing
in
industry
or
legal
publications
or
contributing
to
platforms
like
LinkedIn
can
position
you
as
authoritative
voices
in
your
field.
Have
limited
time?
Focus
on
topics
that
align
with
your
daily
work
or
cases
that
you
are
currently
handling.
This
makes
content
creation
less
time-consuming
but
still
highly
relevant.
Speaking
Engagements
Speaking
at
conferences,
panels,
and
webinars
offers
a
direct
way
to
demonstrate
your
knowledge
and
build
your
professional
reputation.
If
you
are
newer
to
practicing
or
nervous
about
getting
started,
look
for
smaller,
local
engagements
or
virtual
events,
which
require
less
travel
and
time
commitment.
Bar
associations,
legal
organizations,
and
women-focused
networks
can
often
offer
great
opportunities.
Preparing
a
few
key
presentations
on
familiar
topics
allows
you
to
reuse
and
refine
your
material,
reducing
the
prep
time
needed
for
each
new
event.
Awards
And
Recognitions
Actively
pursue
professional
awards
and
recognitions!
Sometimes
women
are
more
shy
or
nervous
about
submitting
for
these,
but
you
should
not
be!
These
accolades
offer
third-party
validation
of
your
skills
and
achievements.
Either
you
or
your
marketing
professional
should
identify
relevant
awards
and
submit
nominations
for
yourself
(and
others).
Social
Media
Social
media,
particularly
LinkedIn,
provides
an
excellent
platform
to
share
your
insights,
successes,
and
opinions.
By
consistently
engaging
with
relevant
content
and
sharing
professional
milestones,
women
lawyers
can
build
a
robust
digital
footprint
that
amplifies
their
personal
brand
with
minimal
time
invested.
Networking
Networking
is
critical
for
elevating
your
profile.
However,
this
doesn’t
mean
that
you
must
attend
every
event
—
that
leads
to
burnout
and
overextension.
Be
strategic
—
choose
key
industry
events,
join
niche
groups
(like
MothersEsquire),
and
cultivate
a
small
but
powerful
network
of
mentors,
peers,
and
influencers
in
your
area
of
law.
Depending
on
what
stage
you
are
at
in
your
career,
it
is
important
to
stay
connected
and
visible.
These
groups
foster
a
sense
of
belonging
in
a
profession
that
can
feel
isolating,
especially
for
mothers
juggling
multiple
roles.
Balancing
a
legal
career
and
motherhood
comes
with
unique
challenges,
such
as
managing
demanding
schedules,
client
expectations,
and
family
obligations.
Networking
with
peers
who
also
cope
with
and
understand
these
struggles
gives
much-needed
emotional
support
and
camaraderie.
These
groups
also
create
a
unique
safe
space
to
share
experiences,
offer
advice,
and
celebrate
successes.
In
our
group,
discussions
often
come
up
on
topics
of
importance
to
lawyer
moms
such
as
navigating
parental
leave
policies,
maintaining
work-life
balance,
or
dealing
with
bias
in
the
workplace.
Members
are
really
generous
about
sharing
their
resources
like
tips
on
time
management,
childcare
solutions,
or
strategies
for
returning
to
work
after
maternity
leave.
It
is
also
a
great
resource
for
referrals,
as
members
regularly
solicit
recommendations
for
lawyers
serving
the
specific
practice
area
and
jurisdiction
that
they
need.
MothersEsquire
has
been
a
great
group
for
networking
and
has
allowed
me
to
connect
with
lawyer
mothers
at
all
different
stages
of
their
careers,
from
law
school
students
to
mothers
with
adult
kids
out
of
college.
By
combining
these
tactics
and
sometimes
getting
out
of
your
comfort
zone
a
bit,
you
can
meaningfully
raise
their
profiles,
even
within
the
constraints
of
a
busy
legal
career
and
often-hectic
family
life.
Susan
Peters
is
the
founder
of
Greybridge
PR,
which
provides
public
relations
and
communications
assistance
for
legal
and
professional
service
firms.
She
was
a
litigator
in
New
York
City
for
over
eight
years
before
switching
careers.
She
is
also
a
member
of
the
board
of
MothersEsquire.