The article – Part Two – discusses proposed modifications to Rule 901(b) concerning the authentication of AI-generated evidence. Judge Grimm and Professor Grossman suggest replacing “accurate” with “valid” and “reliable” to clarify the criteria for admissible evidence, as accuracy alone does not ensure reliability. The piece critiques Professor Capra’s cautious approach to addressing the rise of deepfakes in courtrooms, arguing that the urgency of adapting evidence rules is critical due to the potential for manipulation in high-stakes scenarios, such as elections. It underscores the need for updated rules to combat deepfakes, stressing the importance of maintaining public trust in the judicial system.
Article Link: The Problem of Deepfakes and AI-Generated Evidence: Is it time to revise the rules of evidence? – Part Two | e-Discovery Team
1 post – 1 participant
The article – Part Two – discusses proposed modifications to Rule 901(b) concerning the authentication of AI-generated evidence. Judge Grimm and Professor Grossman suggest replacing “accurate” with “valid” and “reliable” to clarify the criteria for admissible evidence, as accuracy alone does not ensure reliability. The piece critiques Professor Capra’s cautious approach to addressing the rise of deepfakes in courtrooms, arguing that the urgency of adapting evidence rules is critical due to the potential for manipulation in high-stakes scenarios, such as elections. It underscores the need for updated rules to combat deepfakes, stressing the importance of maintaining public trust in the judicial system.
Article Link: The Problem of Deepfakes and AI-Generated Evidence: Is it time to revise the rules of evidence? – Part Two | e-Discovery Team
1 post – 1 participant
Read full topic
