AI in IP Practice: Only as Good as the Person Using It

During LSU’s recent dispute with the SEC over rostering two former NFL players, coach Lane Kiffin reportedly sent his friend, attorney Tom Mars, ChatGPT screenshots supporting his position. According to ESPN, Mars disagreed with most of that analysis.

It happens in business every day. Someone asks an AI tool whether a name presents a trademark problem or an invention is worth patenting, gets a confident answer that matches what they hoped to hear, and moves on. An experienced IP attorney reading the same answer sees where the analysis really begins, and what the answer leaves out.

The Answer Depends on the Question

AI tools respond to how a question is framed. Ask a broad question, and you get a broad answer. Ask a leading question, and you often get agreement. Ask the right follow-up, and the analysis can change completely.

Experienced attorneys know which questions to ask, what context to include, how to steer the tool, and when to challenge an answer that sounds right but isn’t. They can also give an AI tool standing instructions for every task: what to verify, what not to assume, and when to flag something that cannot be confirmed.

The Hardest Part Is What’s Missing

AI is good at answering the question in front of it. It is less reliable at recognizing the question no one asked: the trade show demo that started a filing clock, the ownership gap in a contractor agreement, or the brand name that works in the U.S. but runs into problems in a key export market. Spotting those issues comes from experience with how IP problems actually develop.

What This Means for Clients

Used well, AI lets an experienced attorney test more theories, faster. Ideas that lead nowhere can be ruled out quickly, so clients spend less on dead ends. Options that might otherwise go unexplored can get a closer look.

AI also helps clients prepare. Using AI to learn the basics of an issue, organize facts, and develop questions before a call with counsel can make that conversation more productive.

The risk comes when the AI answer becomes the decision. If an AI tool tells you a patent isn’t worth filing, a name is available or already taken, or a contract term is fine, have counsel test that answer before you act on it.

The Takeaway

Kiffin and Mars were looking at the same screenshots, but they reached different conclusions. The difference was not the technology. It was the judgment applied to the result.