sued<\/a> OpenAI in March for tortious interference with contract, abuse of process, and unlicensed practice of law. The insurer claimed OpenAI engaged in these unlawful acts by assisting Graciela Dela Torre in her attempts to reopen her disability case against Nippon. <\/p>\nNippon\u2019s lawsuit incorporates ChatGPT\u2019s terms of use, but the terms allegedly state that users like Dela Torre \u201cexpressly agree that they will not rely on Output \u2018as a substitute for professional advice.\u2019\u201d Despite agreeing to those terms, Dela Torre \u201cused ChatGPT as a tool to help her, as a pro se litigant, navigate the legal system without the benefit of counsel,\u201d the motion alleged. <\/p>\n
OpenAI also argued that Nippon\u2019s tortious interference claim was legally and factually flawed under Illinois law because the \u201crequisite intent to induce requires active persuasion, encouragement, or incitement that goes far beyond passively and automatically generating information in response to prompts.\u201d<\/p>\n
The artificial intelligence platform used similar arguments to refute Nippon\u2019s claims that OpenAI had assisted in an abuse of process and engaged in unlicensed legal practice.<\/p>\n
\u201cMaking available a general purpose tool like ChatGPT for use by millions of people in the public is not aiding and abetting,\u201d OpenAI said. Nor does ChatGPT have the capacity to practice law or \u201cconsciously, voluntarily and culpably participate in any alleged wrongdoing,\u201d the motion added. <\/p>\n
Legal assistance from artificial intelligence has been recognized as appropriate by the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, the Illinois Supreme Court, and other jurisdictions, OpenAI said. Since Dela Torre wrote the legal filings, Nippon should\u2019ve raised any grievances it had about those filings against her rather than the AI platform, the motion argued. <\/p>\n
Nippon is represented by in-house counsel and Croke, Fairchild, Duarte & Beres LLC. Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC and Mandell PC represent OpenAI.<\/p>\n
The case is Nippon Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. OpenAI Foundation<\/a>, N.D. Ill., No. 1:26-cv-02448, dismissal motion filed 5\/15\/26.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"ChatGPT shouldn\u2019t be treated as a lawyer despite its popular use by pro se litigants to draft legal…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":43020,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[580,26284,1642,157,25842,26283,26285,26286],"class_list":["post-43045","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-openai","tag-chatgpt","tag-contract-law","tag-large-language-models","tag-openai","tag-pro-se-representation","tag-settlements","tag-tortious-interference","tag-unauthorized-practice-of-law"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43045","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=43045"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/43045\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/43020"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=43045"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=43045"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=43045"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}