It’s been a week since the U.S. presidential election and, not surprisingly, people have a lot of questions about what happens now. I’ll never be one to claim to know what the future holds, particularly when it comes to politics, but I feel comfortable saying that tech is poised for disruption on several fronts. 

Countless words have already been devoted to predicting how an impending Trump administration will impact tech regulation in general, and GenAI regulation in particular. It’s been just over a year since the Biden administration signed into effect its Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, which to some marked a significant first step toward national AI regulation, but to others fell short. 

The ultimate impact of the Executive Order may be a moot point, however, as the incoming administration has vowed to repeal it on day one. This is despite the fact that Trump was the first to sign an Executive Order on trustworthy AI use at the tail end of his first term, in December 2020. This is all giving strong move-fast-and-break-things vibes, even though the infamous Silicon Valley mantra has, until now, not been the popular approach to powerful GenAI technology. 

If you’re confused, buckle up. Things are only likely to get more complicated before they become clear and anything concrete happens. 

In the meantime, the legal tech industry doesn’t seem game for leaving the future of AI up to chance. Instead, several leaders are doubling down on efforts to promote and increase diversity in legal tech and GenAI, starting immediately. 

Last week, Cat Moon of Vanderbilt University Law School announced plans to host the first Women + AI Summit to empower women to lead in the space. You can get on the list to receive more information about the event here. 

Similar events are rippling across the legal tech space. For example, Hebbia is hosting a Women in AI event this week in New York, in conjunction with a16z, Index Ventures and GV (Google Ventures), while She Breaks the Law, The Next 100 Years, and Linklaters are planning a women’s event focused on AI in legal next month in London. These are just a few examples of what I expect to be many events promoting women in law, tech, and AI in the coming months. 

And the impetus for change doesn’t stop at improving gender diversity in legal tech. This week, Bob Ambrogi of LawSites, who has been deeply involved in running Startup Alley at ABA TECHSHOW for the past eight years, put out a call for diversity in the submissions from legal tech companies looking to participate in the annual pitch competition. Despite years of diversity at the event, last year’s Startup Alley was an anomaly, with nearly all white male founders pitching —a fluke Ambrogi doesn’t wish to repeat. 

Despite what may happen at a national or even global level, the legal tech community appears to be sticking together, acknowledging the benefits of diversity in innovation. As a member of a female-founded, women-led company whose ranks comprise 75% women, this is one trend I hope to see stick around. 

What I’m Watching:  

Potential future buyer alert: Thomson Reuters reported Q3 revenues of $1.72 billion last week, surpassing expectations. The results follow continued investment in GenAI, with the company reporting over $200 million in AI investments in 2024, double the figure from the previous year. TR also said it has earmarked approximately $10 billion for potential acquisitions through 2027. Most recently, TR acquired Materia, “a specialist in agentic AI for the tax, audit and accounting profession.” So, all you AI startups out there, don’t stop believing. 

Swedish French frAIs: The global smörgåsbord of legal GenAI offerings added a new dish last week, when Swedish GenAI company Leya and French legal ops consultancy Calame announced a new partnership, Artificial Lawyer reported. The new fusion of capabilities is intended to expand the reach of Leya’s technology to both law firms and corporate legal departments in the French market. 

Get an LLM in LLMs: Well, not exactly, but close. Suffolk Law, who has long been a forerunner in tech education at the law school level, announced it will be offering a new 24-credit Master of Laws in Legal Innovations & Technology (LLM in LIT) program. Students can complete the degree in one year if full-time or two years if part-time. The new LLM program is currently still pending ABA acquiescence.  

Show me the money: If you’ve been squatting on some domain names you hope will be valuable one day, this story will give you hope. It was recently reported that OpenAI shelled out a lot of money to obtain the domain chat.com from HubSpot co-founder and CTO Darmesh Shah. While the amount of the sale was not disclosed, it’s suspected to be close to the original $15.5 million paid in 2019 by Shah, who accepted payment in OpenAI shares and officially became an investor in the company, because he said he doesn’t believe in profiting off friends.  

It’s complicated: The New York Times’ relationship with AI developers has taken an interesting new turn. The media giant is famously embroiled in litigation with OpenAI and Microsoft over allegations of illegal data scraping and has refused to enter into a partnership with the AI company as rival media companies have done. Now, though, AI company Perplexity, amidst accusations of scab-like behavior, has offered its services to the NYT to mitigate the impact of the ongoing NYT Tech Guild strike. The NYT has not publicly responded to the offer, but acceptance would come as a shock, given that the NYT sent a cease and desist letter to Perplexity just last month for allegedly illegal training of the developer’s models on NYT content.  

Shattering expectations: A couple weeks ago, I mentioned that Sotheby’s was holding its first-ever sale of artwork created by a humanoid artist—a painting entitled “A.I. God. Portrait of Alan Turing (2024),” painted by humanoid robot Ai-Da, named for 19th century mathematician Ada Lovelace. The famed auction house expected the artwork to fetch between $120,000 and $180,000, but that estimate was off—way off. The painting sold for nearly $1.1 million. The bulk of the proceeds will go to project maintenance, as all the hard work has been tough on Ai-Da, who is already on her third painting arm. Robots, they’re just like us!