On
its
face,
Amazon’s
recent
lawsuit
to
block
Perplexity’s
AI
agents
from
shopping
on
Amazon’s
site
seems
like
just
another
turf
war
between
two
tech
giants
with
little
relevance
for
solo
and
small
law
firms.
By
way
of
background,
Amazon
says
that
Perplexity’s
Comet
browser
unlawfully
accessed
Amazon’s
website
and
customer
accounts
by
disguising
autonomous
AI
agents
as
human
users
to
make
purchases
without
authorization,
while
Perplexity
responds
that
it
simply
enables
users
to
employ
digital
assistants
to
act
on
their
behalf.
As
such,
the
case
raises
the
knotty
problem
of how
to
regulate
AI
agents
acting
on
someone’s
behalf
—
an
issue
that
will
reach
the
legal
profession
sooner
than
most
lawyers
expect.
Let’s
take
a
step
back.
According
to
Claude.AI,
an
AI
agent
is
a
software
system
that
autonomously
performs
tasks
and
makes
decisions
to
achieve
specific
goals,
using
tools
and
adapting
its
approach
without
constant
human
oversight.
AI
agents
don’t
just
assist;
they
act.
And
while
agents
are
currently
in
beta
or
experimental
mode,
it’s
not
difficult
to
envision
how
they
could
be
deployed
in
legal
and
the
attendant
repercussions.
For
example,
just
as
consumers
now
deploy
AI
agents
to
find
products,
clients
will
soon
send
AI
agents
to
find
lawyers.
And
these
agents
won’t
necessarily
evaluate
a
firm
the
way
a
human
would.
They’ll
scrape
your
website,
LinkedIn
posts,
and
online
reviews,
scanning
for
objective
signals
of
competence,
responsiveness,
pricing,
and
availability,
and
assess
how
you
match
up
against
your
competitors.
And
that
witty,
human-sounding
blog
post
that
you
hoped
would
persuade
prospects
that
you’re
relatable?
An
AI
agent
might
ignore
it
entirely
in
favor
of
structured
data
like
published
case
results,
flat-fee
pricing
tables,
or
keyword
clarity.
In
short,
we’re
moving
into
a
world
where
your
marketing
must
persuade
machines
before
it
persuades
people.
Solo
and
small-firm
lawyers
who
rely
on
personal
voice
and
storytelling
will
need
to
start
optimizing
for
machine
readability.
That
doesn’t
mean
abandoning
human
tone,
but
it
does
mean:
-
Structuring
your
website
content
with
clear
metadata
and
FAQ
sections
that
make
it
easy
for
agents
to
extract
key
information. -
Offering
standardized
descriptions
of
practice
areas
(“contested
guardianship
litigation,
fixed-fee
estate
plans,
mediation
services”)
rather
than
narrative-style
prose. -
Using
clean
data
formats
so
AI
crawlers
can
correctly
interpret
your
credentials
and
offerings.
Helping
consumers
find
lawyers
isn’t
the
only
way
that
AI
agents
may
manifest
themselves
in
the
legal
profession.
A
savvy
adversary
could
weaponize
agent
capability.
Picture
a
scenario
where
a
divorce
client
dispatched
an
army
of
AI
agents
to
schedule
“intake
calls”
with
every
family
lawyer
in
town
—
thereby
creating
conflicts
that
prevent
any
of
them
from
representing
the
opposing
spouse.
Today,
that
kind
of
behavior
would
require
dozens
of
phone
calls
and
forged
signatures.
Tomorrow,
it
could
happen
in
seconds,
triggered
by
a
single
prompt:
“Conflict
out
every
lawyer
within
10
miles
of
my
ex.”
Law
firms
will
need
to
develop
clear
policies
to
protect
against
such
misuse.
Just
as
websites
now
post
disclaimers
about
automated
scraping,
firms
may
soon
need
to
adopt
AI-agent
access
policies
stating
whether
automated
agents
are
permitted
to
fill
out
forms
or
schedule
consultations.
Firms
could
also
employ
verification
gates
to
detect
when
submissions
come
from
bots
rather
than
humans
and
software
capable
of
recognizing
duplicate
or
mass-generated
inquiries.
Finally,
don’t
overlook
the
rise
of
“recording
agents.” Clients
may
use
AI-powered
note-takers
to
record
calls
and
then
feed
entire
consultations
into
large
language
models
for
follow-up
analysis.
I’ve
written
about
the
ethics
of
lawyers
recording
conversations
with
clients,
but
when
client
agents
record
without
permission,
it
raises
both
privacy
and
privilege
issues.
Lawyers
should
update
engagement
letters
to
specify
that
no
client
(or
client’s
agent)
may
record
or
transmit
conversations
without
consent.
Meeting-scheduling
systems
should
include
a
disclosure
requiring
human
participation,
not
just
digital
intermediaries.
In
the
coming
years,
AI
agents
will
undoubtedly
become
as
ubiquitous
as
email
or
the
cloud,
quietly
handling
research,
scheduling,
shopping,
and
legal
intake.
Those
solo
and
small
firms
who
deploy
agents
while
structuring
their
online
presence
for
agent
discovery,
setting
boundaries
for
AI-agent
interactions,
and
ensuring
client
data
is
secure
will
thrive
in
the
AI
agent
age.
Carolyn
Elefant
is
one
of
the
country’s
most
recognized
advocates
for
solo
and
small
firm
lawyers.
She
founded
MyShingle.com
in
2002,
the
longest-running
blog
for
solo
practitioners,
where
she
has
published
thousands
of
articles,
resources,
and
guides
on
starting,
running,
and
growing
independent
law
practices.
She
is
the
author
of
Solo
by
Choice,
widely
regarded
as
the
definitive
handbook
for
launching
and
sustaining
a
law
practice,
and
has
spoken
at
countless
bar
events
and
legal
conferences
on
technology,
innovation,
and
regulatory
reform
that
impacts
solos
and
smalls.
Elefant
also
develops
practical
tools
like
the AI
Teach-In to
help
small
firms
adopt
AI
and
she
consistently
champions
reforms
to
level
the
playing
field
for
independent
lawyers.
Alongside
this
work,
she
runs
the
Law
Offices
of
Carolyn
Elefant,
a
national
energy
and
regulatory
practice
that
handles
selective
complex,
high-stakes
matters.