Federal judges are wrestling with how to define artificial intelligence when dealing with evidence presented in trials, with some raising concerns that too broad a definition could sweep in items as common as receipts and thermometers.
The judiciary’s advisory committee on evidence rules heard testimony Friday from a panel of experts in computer science and the intersection between law and technology about how—and if—the judiciary should revise its rules to respond to the rise of generative artificial intelligence services.
Committee Chair Patrick Schiltz, chief judge of the Minnesota federal trial court, raised concerns that any AI policy crafted by the ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.