Category Added in a WPeMatico Campaign
Ed.
Note:
Welcome
to
our
daily
feature
Trivia
Question
of
the
Day!
How
many
ABA-accredited
law
schools
have
never
had
a
woman
as
their
dean?
Hint:
That
includes
two
in
the
T14
—
Cornell
Law
School
and
the
University
of
Michigan
Law
School.
See
the
answer
on
the
next
page.
The
emotional
aspect
of
IP
enforcement
can
never
be
overstated,
especially
among
the
creative
types
that
help
drive
our
economy
and
society
forward.
What
is
true
for
the
IP
owners
trying
to
assert
their
rights
is
also
just
as
true
for
those
finding
themselves
the
enforcement
targets,
a
dynamic
which
makes
our
little
slice
of
the
legal
profession
so
interesting
and
exciting
to
practice
in.
And
as
we
have
seen
before,
adding
in
a
little
bit
of
celebrity
spice
will
often
help
drive
an
IP
enforcement
tale
into
the
mainstream
media,
particularly
when
the
issues
involved
are
connected
to
branding
around
familiar
products.
In
just
the
latest
example,
the
past
week
has
seen
hardcore
IP
media
outlets
like
the
Today
show
focus
in
on
celebrity
chef
(and
previous
star
of
this
column)
David
Chang’s
abortive
attempt
at
assertion
of
a
“Chile
Crunch”
trademark
in
connection
with
his
popular
Momofuku
Chili
Crunch
chili
oil.
What
probably
was
thought
of
as
a
routine
sending
of
cease
and
desist
letters
to
comply
with
the
requirement
of
trademark
owners
to
police
their
marks
took
a
nasty
turn,
with
allegations
of
cultural
misappropriation
and
threats
of
boycott
presaging
a
public
apology
by
Chang
in
short
order.
As
is
often
the
case,
the
story
actually
starts
a
lot
earlier.
For
one,
this
is
not
the
first
time
that
Momufuku
has
turned
to
IP
lawyers
to
help
preserve
its
rights.
In
2022,
it
sent
a
number
of
cease
and
desist
letters
to
a
competitor
restaurant
business,
Yuzu
Kitchen,
based
on
Yuzu’s
use
of
a
peach
logo
that
Momofuku
—
which
translates
to
“lucky
peach”
—
took
offense
to.
Those
letters
were
followed
by
a
complaint
filed
in
the
SDNY,
but
the
case
settled
before
any
substantive
action
took
place.
Still,
my
column
summarizing
a
Chang
podcast
from
a
year
later
noted
Chang’s
expressed
“frustration
at
what
he
calls
the
‘rampant
theft’
in
the
food
industry,
which
he
compares
to
the
struggles
that
fashion
houses
have
in
dealing
with
‘fast
fashion’
competitors
like
Zara
and
others.”
That
frustration
may
have
also
been
informed
by
Chang’s
experience
on
the
receiving
end
of
IP
assertion.
Also
in
2022,
Chang
saw
Momufuku’s
Chili
Crunch
product,
which
was
launched
in
2020,
the
subject
of
a
trademark
lawsuit
of
its
own.
Chile
Colonial,
the
owner
of
a
registered
“Chile
Crunch”
mark,
filed
a
District
of
Colorado
lawsuit
against
Momofuku
in
late
August
2022,
only
to
see
Momofuku
purchase
that
mark
in
settlement
in
March
2023.
A
year
later,
the
company
filed
a
trademark
application
for
the
“Chili
Crunch”
mark
as
well,
in
parallel
with
the
sending
of
cease
and
desist
letters
to
a
set
of
companies
selling
Chili
Crunch
products,
with
the
majority
of
recipients
“small
brands
founded
by
Asian
Americans.”
The
backlash
was
immediate,
with
Chang
finding
himself
branded
a
trademark
bully,
with
a
lawyer
for
one
of
the
letter
recipients
accusing
him
of
“picking
on
small
businesses
with
a
letter
campaign
hoping
they’ll
cave
because
of
the
financial
pressure.”
Making
matters
worse,
Chang
was
accused
by
his
fellow
Asian
American
food
purveyors
of
delivering
a
“punch
in
the
gut”
through
his
legal
action.
Initially,
Momofuku
tried
to
counter
the
charges
by
explaining
that
it
had
to
take
action
due
to
the
legal
requirement
that
trademark
owners
police
their
marks.
That
explanation,
while
legally
correct,
was
not
well-received
by
those
complaining
about
the
situation.
As
a
result,
the
company
was
forced
to
acknowledge
that
the
“situation
has
created
a
painful
divide
between
Momofuku,
the
AAPI
community
we
care
deeply
about,
and
other
companies
sharing
grocery
store
shelves.
But
the
truth
is,
we
all
want
the
same
things:
to
grow,
to
succeed
and
to
make
America’s
pantries
and
grocery
stores
a
more
diverse
place.”
Once
again,
Chang
found
himself
let
down
by
the
legal
process
when
it
came
to
IP
issues.
Not
only
was
he
forced
to
purchase
the
trademark
to
protect
himself,
but
he
was
unable
to
utilize
the
mark
he
purchased
to
position
his
company’s
interests
in
a
more
favorable
way
from
a
trademark
perspective.
Under
the
circumstances,
what
I
wrote
about
his
IP
comments
last
year
rings
true
—
namely,
that
Chang’s
“status
as
an
IP
owner
has
not
cooled
his
frustration
at
the
lack
of
respect
for
IP
in
the
food
industry
[…]
especially
when
he
sees
innovators
in
other
industries
rewarded
through
workable
mechanisms
for
balancing
access
to
IP
protected
material
and
the
need
to
foster
additional
innovation.”
At
the
same
time,
there
should
have
been
at
least
some
expectation
on
his
end
that
targeting
small
businesses
owned
by
others
sharing
his
ethnic
background
might
have
met
a
cool
reception
in
the
court
of
public
opinion.
Ultimately,
it
is
hard
not
to
sympathize
with
a
business
owner
like
Chang,
who
has
already
been
upfront
about
his
struggles
in
navigating
the
complex
IP
legal
landscape.
Thankfully
for
him,
however,
he
can
afford
high-quality
legal
representation,
as
well
the
full
menu
of
legal
options
available
to
protect
his
rights
on
both
the
offensive
and
defensive
sides
of
the
IP
ledger.
For
smaller
companies
in
his
industry,
be
they
other
restaurants
or
food
wholesalers,
that
same
luxury
is
not
available.
But
as
seen
in
the
Chili
Crunch
conflagration,
the
power
of
the
public
can’t
be
underestimated
—
and
in
fact
can
act
as
a
great
equalizer
for
those
facing
aggressive
action
at
the
hands
of
a
trademark
bully.
This
will
not
be
the
last
time
an
erstwhile
trademark
enforcer
will
be
bounced
out
of
the
kitchen.
Please
feel
free
to
send
comments
or
questions
to
me
at
gkroub@kskiplaw.com
or
via
Twitter:
@gkroub.
Any
topic
suggestions
or
thoughts
are
most
welcome.
Gaston
Kroub
lives
in
Brooklyn
and
is
a
founding
partner
of
Kroub,
Silbersher
&
Kolmykov
PLLC,
an
intellectual
property
litigation
boutique,
and Markman
Advisors
LLC,
a
leading
consultancy
on
patent
issues
for
the
investment
community.
Gaston’s
practice
focuses
on
intellectual
property
litigation
and
related
counseling,
with
a
strong
focus
on
patent
matters.
You
can
reach
him
at gkroub@kskiplaw.com or
follow
him
on
Twitter: @gkroub.
Despite
the
droves
of
young
attorneys
that
flock
to
major
law
firms
after
law
school
graduation,
Biglaw
isn’t
the
long-term
plan
for
most
attorneys.
Whether
it’s
the
hours,
the
stress,
or
the
up-or-out
model
—
Biglaw
isn’t
the
long-term
plan
for
most.
Sure,
it’s
a
great
place
to
learn
a
lot
—
and
pay
down
student
debt
—
but
many
yearn
for
the
green
grass
of
in-house
life.
And
one
Biglaw
firm
is
trying
to
make
that
transition
easier.
Earlier
this
week,
Husch
Blackwell
launched
HB
In-House,
a
professional
development
program
designed
to
help
attorneys
at
the
firm
who
are
interested
in
making
the
leap
to
in-house.
The
program’s
goals
are
two-fold:
1)
provide
attorneys
with
an
inside
view
of
their
clients’
roles
and
responsibilities;
and
2)
for
those
attorneys
interested
in
moving
in-house,
provide
them
with
the
tools
necessary
for
a
successful
transition
to
an
in-house
position.
How
refreshing
for
a
firm
to
admit
its
attorneys
may
want
to
move,
and
to
provide
opportunities
toward
that
end
for
everyone.
Too
often,
the
transition
to
the
next
phase
in
an
attorney’s
career
is
left
to
the
chance
of
the
matters
you
happen
to
be
placed
on
or
personal
connections.
This
program
creates
a
clear
path
for
those
interested
in
exploring
options
other
than
Biglaw.
Chief
Client
Officer
Angela
Quinn
said,
“There
is
nothing
like
this
in
the
marketplace
right
now
and
is
another
example
of
our
uncommon
approach
to
running
a
law
firm
and
serving
our
clients
and
our
people.
We
recognize
that
not
everyone
wants
to
follow
the
traditional
partner
track,
and
this
is
our
way
of
ensuring
that
we
are
training
our
lawyers
to
grow
by
providing
them
varied
career
opportunities
to
accomplish
that.
We
are
already
a
top
supplier
of
in-house
talent,
and
we
see
this
as
a
great
service
to
our
clients
as
we
train
future
generations
of
in-house
talent.”
Twenty-five
of
the
firm’s
clients
helped
to
create
the
curriculum
for
HB
In-House.
Joe
Glynias,
Chair
and
HB
In-House
program
architect,
said,
“It
is
not
possible
to
capture
the
gratitude
we
have
for
these
client
partners
who
gave
and
will
give
so
much
of
their
time
to
help
build
a
future
for
other
attorneys
who
want
to
better
understand
the
role
and
life
of
in-house
counsel.
We
are
fortunate
to
have
such
committed
partners,
and
we
know
there
are
countless
more
who
will
team
with
us
as
the
program
progresses.”
So
what,
exactly
will
participants
learn
in
the
first
iteration
of
the
program?
Education:
Participants
will
learn
about
the
roles
and
responsibilities
of
in-house
attorneys,
the
structure
of
legal
teams,
and
the
differences
between
private
practice
and
in-house
legal
work.
This
information
will
help
them
assess
if
an
in-house
position
aligns
with
their
career
goals.
Training: The
training
series
will
cover
topics
such
as
understanding
a
company’s
business
and
how
legal
departments
support
business
goals,
managing
a
budget,
comprehending
key
financial
statements
and
reports,
identifying,
assessing,
managing
and
mitigating
risks,
building
relationships
and
being
part
of
a
team,
and
developing
leadership
skills.
Participants
will
actively
engage
in
learning
these
skills
and
applying
them
to
real-world
scenarios.
Coaching:
During
the
course
period,
attorneys
will
have
access
to
various
coaching
programs.
These
programs
include
individual
coaching,
the
opportunity
to
join
a
coaching
cohort,
and
being
paired
with
an
in-house
advisor
to
receive
guidance
and
mentorship.
Additionally,
attorneys
may
be
offered
the
chance
to
participate
in
a
secondment,
which
will
provide
an
immersive
experience.
Kudos
to
the
firm
for
the
innovative
program
that
marries
the
needs
of
associates
and
clients
in
a
way
that
helps
everyone.
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@Kathryn1@mastodon.social.
Spring
has
officially
sprung,
the
weather
is
finally
starting
to
get
nice.
What
better
time
for
a
Biglaw
firm
to
announce
that
it’s
interested
in
making
big
money
moves
for
associates?
Earlier
this
week,
Morris
Nichols
Arsht
&
Tunnell,
a
Delaware
firm
rated
as
one
of
the
best
in
the
Mid-Atlantic
region
by
Vault,
announced
that
it
would
be
increasing
salaries
for
all
associates
and
special
counsel,
effective
immediately.
Entry-level
associates
at
the
firm
will
now
be
making
$210,000,
up
$20,000
from
the
$190,000
they’d
been
making
previously.
According
to
a
press
release,
Morris
Nichols
is
a
firm
that
prides
itself
on
its
“commitment
to
attracting
and
retaining
top-tier
attorneys
to
sustain
[its]
position
as
a
leading
Delaware
law
firm,”
so
while
nothing
is
specifically
mentioned
about
salary
increases
for
all
other
associates,
we
imagine
they
must
be
seeing
commensurate
raises
as
well.
So,
why
did
the
firm
decide
to
raise
salaries
once
again?
Because
like
all
other
firms,
Morris
Nichols
wants
to
take
advantage
of
the
lateral
market.
From
the
firm’s
press
release:
“Our
ability
to
attract
and
retain
top-notch
associates
and
special
counsel
is
the
cornerstone
of
our
Firm’s
continued
success,”
said
Bill
Lafferty,
chair
of
Morris
Nichols’
executive
committee.
“Delaware
is
a
remarkable
place
to
practice
law,
with
the
best
courts
and
judges
in
the
country
and
headline-grabbing
cases
of
national
significance.
By
prioritizing
attorney
recruiting
and
development,
we
aim
to
remain
competitive
for
the
best
legal
talent
in
the
country.”
Better
late
than
never!
This
first-year
salary
bump
may
not
match
the
Cravath
money
that’s
become
the
prevailing
rate
in
more
major
markets
($225K
for
the
Class
of
2023,
to
be
specific),
but
more
money
is
more
money,
so
congratulations
to
all
associates
at
the
firm.
Remember
everyone,
we
depend
on
your
tips
to
stay
on
top
of
compensation
updates,
so
when
your
firm
announces
or
matches,
please
text
us
(646-820-8477)
or email
us (subject
line:
“[Firm
Name]
Bonus/Matches”).
Please
include
the
memo
if
available.
You
can
take
a
photo
of
the
memo
and
send
it
via
text
or
email
if
you
don’t
want
to
forward
the
original
PDF
or
Word
file.
And
if
you’d
like
to
sign
up
for
ATL’s
Bonus
Alerts
(which
is
the
alert
list
we
also
use
for
salary
announcements),
please
scroll
down
and
enter
your
email
address
in
the
box
below
this
post.
If
you
previously
signed
up
for
the
bonus
alerts,
you
don’t
need
to
do
anything.
You’ll
receive
an
email
notification
within
minutes
of
each
bonus
announcement
that
we
publish.
Thanks
for
your
help!
Morris
Nichols
Raises
Associate
Starting
Salary
[Morris
Nichols]
Staci
Zaretsky is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law,
where
she’s
worked
since
2011.
She’d
love
to
hear
from
you,
so
please
feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
comments,
or
critiques.
You
can
follow
her
on
X/Twitter
and
Threads
or
connect
with
her
on
LinkedIn.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.
Image
courtesy
of
LexisNexis.
Ever
since
generative
AI
burst
into
our
lives,
the
race
was
on
to
deliver
artificial
intelligence
to
lawyers
in
a
way
that
might
not
get
them
sanctioned.
So
far,
the
industry
seems
as
focused
on
expectation
management
as
anything
else.
Figuring
out
what
AI
actually
looks
like
in
the
legal
workflow
sucks
up
as
more
energy
as
playing
around
with
new
offerings.
Which
is
why
the
second
generation
products
are
arguably
more
interesting
for
showing
us
a
bit
of
the
lessons
learned
over
the
past
several
months.
Lexis+
AI
went
live
back
in
October,
and
while
it
already
delivered
Above
the
Law’s
favorite
application
—
the
ability
to
write
a
snarky,
derisive
cease
&
desist
letter
—
there
was
always
room
to
grow.
Today,
Lexis
announced
that
a
new
generation
will
be
available
to
subscribers
in
May
with
a
number
of
critical
enhancements:
So
what
does
this
all
mean?
Some
of
the
improvements
represent
natural
steps
along
the
charted
path.
BIGGER
capacity
for
document
analysis!
MORE
contextual
prompts!
FASTER,
FASTER,
FASTER!
But
there’s
some
new
stuff
in
there.
New
delivery
options
take
AI
to
where
the
users
most
want
it,
and
that’s
the
sort
of
workflow
insight
that
we’re
going
to
figure
out
as
we
stroll
along
this
AI
journey.
Meanwhile,
summarization
is
a
core
AI
use
case.
Statute
summaries
must
reflect
a
need
they’re
seeing
out
there
among
the
users.
Let’s
check
the
PATRIOT
ACT:
OK,
maybe
a
bad
example.
But
the
inclusion
of
the
U.S.
Voting
Laws
&
Legislation
Center
materials
just
in
time
for
the
2024
election
is
a
fantastic
move.
We’ve
written
about
the
Center
in
the
past,
but
it’s
an
invaluable
tool
for
anyone
trying
to
stay
on
top
of
their
rights
and,
importantly,
challenging
voter
suppression
efforts.
If
you’re
interested,
you
can
sign
up
for
the
insider
program
here.
Earlier:
Lexis+
AI
Arrived
This
Morning…
So
What
Do
You
Think?
New
LexisNexis
Generative
AI
Writes
Mean
Cease
&
Desist
Letters,
Becoming
The
AI
We
Never
Knew
We
Needed
Joe
Patrice is
a
senior
editor
at
Above
the
Law
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
Feel
free
to email
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments.
Follow
him
on Twitter if
you’re
interested
in
law,
politics,
and
a
healthy
dose
of
college
sports
news.
Joe
also
serves
as
a
Managing
Director
at
RPN
Executive
Search.