NotebookLM just got even smarter with new audio features that make it easier to dive into your content. Now, you can guide your “Deep Dive” Audio Overviews by giving specific instructions—focus on key topics or adjust the expertise level to match your needs, like handing the AI a script before it goes live. Plus, with background listening, you can keep exploring your sources, pulling citations, and grabbing key quotes—all without interrupting the audio. It’s like having an expert in your ear, while you stay in full control.

Listen to past episodes on your favorite platform here https://mitch-jackson.com/podcast

Buckle up—because this episode is going to change the way you think about AI in the courtroom. We’re diving into the Matter of Weber, a case out of Saratoga County, New York, that just flipped the script on expert testimony and how courts are handling AI.

Picture this: an expert witness, called to testify about damages in a trust dispute, drops the bomb that he used Microsoft Copilot—yes, an AI tool—to cross-check his calculations. Sounds convenient, right? Well, there’s a catch. When asked about how Copilot arrived at its results, the expert had no idea. He couldn’t recall what he inputted or explain the AI’s logic. That’s when things got interesting. The judge wasn’t having it—and neither would you if someone tried to sell you a car but couldn’t explain how the engine worked.

The court threw down the gauntlet, setting new guidelines that force attorneys to disclose when they’re using AI to generate evidence. Not only that, but from now on, AI-generated testimony might be headed straight for a Frye hearing to test whether it holds up. Game changer, right?

But here’s where it gets even juicier. The judge didn’t just critique the expert—he used AI himself to test the witness’s methodology! Talk about turning the tables. The judge ran similar prompts through Microsoft Copilot and got completely different results, casting doubt on the expert’s testimony. This moment? It’s the real twist in the Weber case. It raises serious questions about whether judges should step into the AI ring themselves.

We’re talking about a case that just might show us how AI is used in future courtrooms. Should AI-generated evidence be treated the same as traditional expert testimony? What about the “black box” problem where even the experts can’t explain how the AI made its decisions? And, most importantly, how far is too far when judges start experimenting with AI themselves to evaluate evidence?

In this episode, we’re pulling back the curtain on the Weber case and its huge implications for the future of law. It’s a wake-up call for every lawyer, judge, and legal professional—AI is here, and it’s not waiting for you to catch up.

Trust me, this is one episode you can’t afford to miss. The future of expert testimony is changing—are you ready to evolve with it? Let’s get into it!

Want to read more about this case and issue. See Judge Scott Schlegel's post titled, "AI in the Courtroom: Experts, Judges, and the Twist in Weber" posted in Mitch's "AI In Law" group on LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7252671784632664064?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

Listen to past and future episodes on your favorite podcast platform. Start at https://mitch-jackson.com/podcast

Imagine AI prompts as the modern-day paintbrush, pen, or camera—tools that blend human creativity with machine precision to create stunning, original, copyrightable works. In this episode, I’ll explain why AI-generated art, writing, code, and more deserve full copyright protection and how innovative prompts are reshaping the way we think about authorship.

While the U.S. Copyright Office currently holds that a work must have sufficient human authorship to qualify for protection, I’ll challenge that interpretation. I believe crafting AI prompts can be an art form in and of itself, requiring creative vision, intellectual effort, and iteration—just like a painter perfecting a masterpiece. We’ll dive into the four key reasons why AI-assisted creations should be considered under the same legal protection as traditional art forms, from how prompts act like brushstrokes to how human creativity drives the final result.

Get ready for a bold, fresh take on copyright in the AI era and discover why the future of creativity involves a seamless collaboration between human and machine.

Past episodes https://mitch-jackson.com/podcast