WARNING! Using AI to Research Your Legal Case can Lead to the Other Side Being Able to Get Your AI History Including Otherwise Privileged Things

Here is a little legal amuse-bouche with which to start off the weekend:

Generally speaking, if you share with a third party things that are otherwise privileged, such as your conversations with your attorney, or their work product prepared during their representation of you, that's known as "breaking the privilege", and the other side can then demand and discover that. It's no different when that third "person" is a public AI, as Bradley Heppner found out, much to his dismay, when his use of Claude to do research on his case, including uploading some of his attorney's work product to Claude, was suddenly allowed to be used by the FBI in prosecuting the case against him.

I happen to have the transcript of the hearing in which the judge said, among other things:

---
HEPPNER'S LAWYER: All I would say is that those reports
incorporated information that we had conveyed to Mr. Heppner
over the course of our representation after learning things
from the government.

THE COURT: And he disclosed it to a third-party, in
effect, AI, which had an express provision that what was
submitted was not confidential.
----

Using AI to play "lawyer" to your lawyer, it's not just a bad idea, it's evidence.

Notes from the Front members: The 11-page transcript is below.

Not a member? Join us to access all documents, our private chat, our private dropbox including all the Epstein files (even the disappeared ones), etc.. Plus your $5 a month helps support my efforts grabbing, purchasing, explaining, and storing documents before they can be disappeared (much of which I have to pay for out of my own pocket):