Have you noticed how the existing technology stack providers quietly added an AI layer to their existing offerings? These days, you open a PDF in Adobe Acrobat and a floating panel appears: "Ask questions, get summaries, and find information across your document." You begin drafting an email in Gmail and Gemini offers to finish the sentence for you. You click into a Word document and Copilot is sitting in the toolbar, ready to summarise, rewrite, or generate content from your files.

Over the last year, directors and board advisors have told us there is plenty of noise about AI - but far less meaningful guidance that speaks to the realities of the boardroom and would make directors comfortable with the unique risks AI introduces.

At Law Squared, we, like many in the legal and tech communities, are closely monitoring the evolving landscape of AI and copyright law. In June 2025, a significant development occurred when a U.S. federal judge ruled in favor of Meta Platforms Inc. in a copyright lawsuit brought by authors including Sarah Silverman and Ta-Nehisi Coates. The authors alleged that Meta had unlawfully used their works to train its AI system, LLaMA.

Disputes + Litigation lawyer Sarah Cooney discusses key differences, risks and a shared commitment to principles in the approaches to the use of Gen AI in courtrooms on either side of the Murray, below.

Law Squared is proud to have assisted clinical AI platform Oscer, raise an impressive $5 million to further develop their educational and second opinion platform to eliminate missed medical diagnoses.