English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) that arebeing applied to legal efforts have raised controversial questions about theexistent restrictions imposed on the practice-of-law. Generally, the legalfield has sought to define Authorized Practices of Law (APL) versusUnauthorized Practices of Law (UPL), though the boundaries are at timesamorphous and some contend capricious and self-serving, rather than beingdevised holistically for the benefit of society all told. A missing ingredientin these arguments is the realization that impending legal professiondisruptions due to AI can be more robustly discerned by examining the matterthrough the lens of a framework utilizing the autonomous levels of AI LegalReasoning (AILR). This paper explores a newly derived instrumental griddepicting the key characteristics underlying APL and UPL as they apply to theAILR autonomous levels and offers key insights for the furtherance of thesecrucial practice-of-law debates.

Authorized and Unauthorized Practices of Law: The Role of Autonomous Levels of AI Legal Reasoning