Last month I did a post called July 2026 Legal Tech Recap highlighting items I found of interest relating to legal technology. So of course, with the second edition, I decided on a rebrand, as you note in the subject line above. The advances in legal tech now are rapid and stunning.  It’s hard for lawyers to keep up. I’ve decided I can contribute with Legal Tech Finds.

Legal Tech Finds posts are not intended to be comprehensive. Each month I’ll share a limited number of posts I found interesting. Nominations are not requested. I’ll always try to include something useful for smaller law firms. I’ll share other items of note, like the new judicial resource for AI noted below.

So here’s my business model with these posts. Honestly, sometimes I read something online that is so noteworthy I want to share it. Sharing this kind of content was my job for a long time. Picking a few highlights each month and sharing them with an audience seems right. Now a confession. I haven’t been the most consistent blogger the last several years and lost subscribers along the way. So, if you are so inclined to share this post with others who might be interested, I’d appreciate it.  They can subscribe either to the feed or to receive the posts via email. I’ll continue to share some law practice tips and information about access to justice issues. And away we go!

Your Client Is Already Using AI. Now What?

Julie Bays, my former colleague with the Oklahoma Bar Association, wrote Your Client Is Already Using AI. Now What? – Oklahoma Bar Association for the Oklahoma Bar Journal. There have been several judicial opinions holding that conversations with AI cannot be privileged even if the user was preparing to meet with a lawyer and using the tool to organize their thoughts. One can imagine a terrified young person inquiring of ChatGPT if what they had done was a crime? Julie provides tips on advising your clients about this developing area of the law. If you ever have the opportunity to speak to a group of students, they will find this interesting.

The Judicious Judge’s Guide to Generative Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models

I do read most of Judge Scott Schlegel’s posts. So I doubt this will be the last time I cite him here.

The Judicious Judge’s Guide to Generative Artificial Intelligence and Large Language Models has been accepted to appear in the Columbia Science and Technology Law Review, Vol. 28, No. 2 (forthcoming May 2027) It is a 50 page book that is co-authored by Judge Xavier Rodriguez, Judge Allison Goddard, Prof. Maura R. Grossman, Judge Samuel Thumma and Judge Scott Schlegel. It is a free download available now through SSRN.

From the Abstract:

This paper provides guidance for judges and their chambers, using the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct (MCJC) as a foundation. It aims to help U.S. judges and their chambers use AI tools in ways that enhance, rather than erode, core judicial values. Sections I and II provide basic technical and ethical guidance. Sections III through V offer guidance on how GenAI may be adopted responsibly within chambers. Section VI discusses GenAI-related issues currently arising in litigation. Appendix A illustrates common chambers tasks for which GenAI may be responsibly used, identifies categories of tools suited to each task, and offers example prompts. Appendix B provides a list of guidance issued by various federal and state courts as well as select international courts.

This publication provides a great opportunity to have an exchange with your local judiciary about AI. It is hard to see them objecting to a free book that was written by other judges.

AI Watermarks Explained in Plain English

So AI is now embedding hidden code in documents to rat you out that you used AI to create the document? This month I’d say Paul Unger’s AI Watermarks Explained in Plain English is a “must read” with important information you and your clients need to know.

The last-mile lawyer

“Clients will use AI to travel most of their legal journey themselves, but the last steps to their solution will be the hardest. Lawyers should own that high-value last mile — and price it accordingly,” says Jordan Furlong in his post The last-mile lawyer on Substack.

“Billing by the hour is like billing by the kilometre. If you only charge the client for the final 10% of their journey, you are vastly underpricing the value of your services, because that final 10% requires your scarce and indispensable expertise. It’s in that last mile of the journey where a disproportionate share of value will be located. That’s why lawyer pricing has to shift away from measuring the amount of lawyer input into the process, and towards measuring the significance of the lawyer’s output to the resolution,” Furlong says.

The Risk of Shared Links

Wait…Do you mean every link I’ve ever created to share things could still be active?

Ernest Svenson notes the risks in The AI Leak That Wasn’t an AI Problem: The Risk of Shared Links in his The 82/20 Principle column in Attorney at Work.