A recent criminal case, United States v. Heppner, underscores the nonconfidential nature of public AI platforms. AI-generated legal research conducted by the defendant was admitted as evidence, despite attempts to claim attorney-client privilege or work product protection.
The court deemed that communications with a public AI tool were not privileged, as use of the tool constituted disclosure to a third party and lacked a reasonable expectation of confidentiality. The case underscores that AI tools are not attorneys and cannot confer the legal privileges of working with one.