I had the great privilege and joy of attending the 2024 ILTACON in Nashville, TN. I’m sure I will be ruminating on and unpacking all the things I learned and conversations that I had for weeks to come, but I wanted to initially share three quick takeaways and themes that I saw repeated throughout the conference.
New Mask, Same Task
Since almost the very beginning of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), Robert Downey Jr. has been playing Tony Stark/Ironman. I suspect if you’re reading this, you’re at least tangentially aware of the MCU, but on the off chance you’re not caught up with the storylines, let’s just say…his time in that role has ended and we thought we’d never see him in an MCU movie again, except maybe in flashbacks.
For reasons not entirely clear to me, but I guess I will trust - which may be another metaphor in its own right - it was recently announced that Downey will be playing Dr. Doom in the next phase of the MCU. While the MCU has reused actors in different parts before, these are two very large roles and it doesn’t seem like Downey as Dr. Doom will spend the entire time obscured by makeup/costume/CGI.
The clearly pre-planned marketing hook for this as announced by Downey when he appeared on the stage at San Diego Comic-Con is “New Mask, Same Task.”
And thus launched 1000 content pieces from fandom media to analyze what that meant until the movie he’s set to appear in is released.
Perhaps that’s why I kept thinking of it while talking to people and listening to presentations at ILTACON 2024. Just like last year, the main topic of conversation was Generative AI and Large Language Models and how they are going to affect, well, everything. However, while last year was about initial impressions and educated guesses, this year we had a lot more data about implementation, successes, and areas ripe for improvement.
I was struck by the fact that although there are potentially some enhanced use cases and tweaked workflows because of these new technologies, for those that support the use of them…well, it’s not a wildly different world. All of the best practices for successful implementation of a new technological tool that we try to enforce are pretty much the ones you want to use for Generative AI and LLMs. So, whether you are working with a new tool or supporting someone with a job title that now has “Artificial Intelligence” in it, just think to yourself “New mask, same task.”
Fillers, Spillers, and Thrillers
I am a pretty avid gardener. When creating floral arrangements or container gardens, there’s a recipe to use for the best visual presentation as well as use of space. (After you read this, look at designed planters the next time you’re out and about and you’ll be able to crack the code.) You want to pick three types of plants: A filler, a spiller, and a thriller. The Filler is a lower cost plant that can bulk up and cover a lot of ground in the planter. The Spiller is a vine or trailing plant that goes over the edge of the planter and extends the visual space of the vegetation. Finally, the Thriller is often an expensive plant that has high visual impact (either because of size, color, or other factors) and that has a “wow” factor.
I noticed this same pattern in the sessions and conversations about Gen AI POCs and initial project reviews. A common pattern was that firms and legal departments were choosing to implement three Gen AI tools: Microsoft Copilot (Filler), a research or multi-use tool like Thomson Reuters’ CoCounsel or vLex’s Vincent (Spiller), and a narrowly focused or subject specific tool, such as a Patent specific one. (Thriller.)
Now, I’m just a simple country law librarian and legal technologist, but it seems like adopting the flower container pattern of tech trials seems like a good way to think about planning technology POCs. It allows you to cover many different user constituencies and potential use cases while making the most of perhaps a limited monetary, personnel, or time budget. If you’ve yet to start your Gen AI/LLM journey and are overwhelmed by how to start, maybe pick three based on this pattern.
On a related note, I have said many times - somewhat facetiously but also not - that there are really only four or five types of legal technology, and the rest is just marketing. I’m now starting to seriously consider that there’s maybe just three types.
Oh, I’m just kidding.
Or am I?
The Busy, Busy World of LegalTech
As a child of the 1980s and someone who lived in the middle of nowhere and saw more cows than humans, my understanding of what The Real and Adult World was like was heavily influenced by the series of early reader books by Richard Scarry. I probably shouldn’t admit this, but when I’m analyzing a piece of technology and thinking about who the end users are, my mental picture of a law firm or legal department is very visually similar to a double page layout in one of these books. Instead of a pig firefighter, a rabbit doctor, or worm driving an apple car, I almost picture a calico cat working on a server or a dog at a desk making a PowerBI dashboard. The thing that I love the most about ILTACON is that all the people I have to try to mentally put myself in the shoes of are there in front of me (in human form, to boot.)
Just about every conversation about legal technology is really a conversation about people and the collection of people who are both the subject and creators of these conversations are at ILTACON. The attendees come from a wide variety of job duties, employers, and cultures and I appreciate that there are very few barriers placed between us to inhibit us from coming together to share and learn from each other. That being said, I think my favorite educational opportunities are when I’m seated with people that I don’t know and I can eavesdrop on conversations about what’s going wrong and right with their tech. I could say I’m doing some anthropological ethnographic discovery but the truth is that I’m terribly nosy and usually too shy to introduce myself.
The attendance make-up of ILTACON is not perfect. I would love to see more librarians able to attend, both from the private and academic worlds. One of my big trend takeaways from AALL was the realization that straight “legal research” tools are going to be few and far between. Instead, research and research tools are going to be more integrated than they already are with workflow and other technology verticals, so it would behoove librarians to be able to see the other pieces of the puzzle. I’ve also long held the idea that librarians should be integrated more into the tech vetting process as the librarian skills set is perfect for this task. Additionally, I wish there was a way for more legal tech educators and their students to attend ILTA. Legal tech on both the customer and creator side is a viable career path for someone with a former legal education of many types. More outreach to newer members of the legal professions would be mutually beneficial.
