< img src = "/uploads/blogs/bb/f4/ib-fiivgive_e444360b3.jpg" Alt = "South Carolina Supreme Court allowed the use of AI in the state court system"/> ~ ~ ~ < P > Officials and South Carolina's judiciary can only use those programs of generative artificial intelligence that are approved by the Supreme Court or State court administration.
~ ~ < P > The Chief Judge of the Supreme Court of South Carolina issued a temporary order that establishes rules for the use of generative artificial intelligence in the state power branch. About this & nbsp; reports & nbsp; abcnews4.< P > Decision of the Chief Judge & nbsp; < strong > John Kitter & nbsp; nbsp; with & Rsquo; Advantages and risks, prob & rsquo; ~
> 62 ~ < p >& laquo; generative AI has the potential to increase productivity, helping different tasks, including preparation of documents, editing texts, generation of ideas and software development & raquo ;, & mdash; It is at disposal. & mdash; & laquo; however, the use of generative si to perform these tasks creates potential risks & raquo;.
< P > Judge Kitteredzh stressed that content created by generative AI, as well as public access to information introduced into such programs may pose a threat to safety or privacy and carry the following risks:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > < Ul > < li > Inaccuracy (inaccuracies)
< li > bias
< li > vulnerability in the field of cybersecurity
< li > Unsetting use of OB & Rsquo; intellectual property
< p >< strong > What does this mean for the judiciary of South Carolina ?0 ~/Strong >0 ~/P > ~ > 62 > 62 ~ 62 < p >The ruling of the scenery states that South Carolina's officials and employees of the judiciary can only use those programs of generative AI, which are approved by the Supreme Court or the administration of South Carolina courts. That is, it is about any tools or systems of generative AI purchased, purchased or provided to officials and employees of the judiciary.
< P > According to the order, these officials and employees cannot use a generative AI to prepare memoranda, orders, conclusions or other documents without direct human supervision and approval. The chief judge noted that generative AI tools are intended for & laquo; assistance & raquo;, not for replacement of judicial, legal or other professional examination. Content generated by AI cannot be used literally or considered true, reliable or accurate, is said in an order.
< p >In addition, the content of a generative AI cannot be considered a single source or reference and cannot be the basis for making & laquo; final decisions & raquo;. Neither the AI nor the generative AI may be used to process or analyze confidential court records or privileged information and messages if there is no direct permission according to the order.
~ < P > The judiciary may use a generative AI to assist in legal issues, as well as to create or change the software code within the permitted limits after potential risks, provo & rsquo; < p > The decision states that the judiciary of South Carolina will develop curricula for judicial officials and workers to demonstrate the correct and improper use of the AI and generative AI, and temporary policy violations will be subject to & laquo; in case of their confirmation.
< p >< strong > what does this mean to lawyers ?
~ ~ ~ < P > Temporary policy does not directly apply the generative AI attorneys and parties, but they are reminded of the need to ensure accuracy & laquo; all working products & raquo; and indicate caution by relying on & laquo; any result & raquo; generative si.
< P > Lawyers should guarantee that the use of generative AI does not jeopardize the privacy of the client or does not violate the rules of South Carolina's professional ethics.