Title: The Legal Risks of ChatGPT: What Communicators Need to Know
Artificial Intelligence (AI) chatbots have become increasingly popular for brainstorming and generating creative ideas. One such chatbot is ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI and Microsoft. However, there are crucial legal issues surrounding its usage that often go overlooked. According to a survey conducted by law firm Baker & McKenzie, many executives diving into the world of AI fail to consider the potential risks associated with it. While we do not offer legal advice, it is essential for professional communicators to be aware enough to raise their concerns.
To begin with, one of the primary legal concerns revolves around the app’s Terms of Use and the confidentiality of user-entered information, or prompts. The FAQs clearly state that sharing sensitive information in conversations with the app is discouraged. However, it remains unclear whether the input data is retained even if users choose to opt out. This lack of clarity raises concerns about the potential exposure of confidential information. Just as Samsung engineers found out when their proprietary programming code unintentionally showed up in the app’s answers, there is a risk that confidential ideas or intellectual property may be inadvertently leaked.
Ownership of the output generated by ChatGPT is another grey area. As it stands, machine learning models’ output may not necessarily belong to the user, and this content might not even be protected as intellectual property. This ownership ambiguity poses a significant concern for companies’ law departments, as AI-generated content could end up being used by others without proper attribution or approval.
Moreover, while ChatGPT can assist with writing work emails and memos, it raises the issue of redundancy. OpenAI openly admits that its app’s output may not be unique across users, potentially leading to multiple individuals sounding alike in their communications. This poses a risk when numerous emails or messages sound similar, potentially raising suspicions about plagiarism or lack of authenticity.
Additionally, inherent biases within AI models are a well-known concern. Human bias can unintentionally infiltrate these models since they are trained using data created by humans. Prejudices related to race, gender, and sexual orientation can find their way into AI-generated communications, creating ethical dilemmas for organizations striving for unbiased and inclusive practices.
OpenAI’s terms of use explicitly prohibit users from misrepresenting AI-generated output as human-generated. The company’s publication policy further insists on clear and conspicuous disclosure of AI’s role in the content creation process. However, how well users can avoid these requirements by making minor adjustments to the copy remains uncertain.
Lastly, due to the inherent nature of AI and machine learning, flaws and mistakes are bound to happen. ChatGPT has been known to make errors or hallucinations, attributed to its training on vast amounts of text data. Despite these shortcomings, OpenAI limits its liability for any damages to a mere $100, and users may even be held responsible for defending and indemnifying OpenAI against any claims.
In conclusion, utilizing AI chatbots like ChatGPT can be a valuable tool for idea generation and brainstorming. However, overlooking the legal risks involved can have severe consequences. From confidentiality concerns to ownership ambiguity, redundant output, biases, disclosure requirements, and limited liability for mistakes, there are significant aspects that communicators must be mindful of. While this article does not provide legal advice, it emphasizes the need for professionals to exercise caution and seek guidance from their organizations’ law departments when engaging with ChatGPT or similar AI-powered tools.
