By Tatum Sabourin and Zachary Murphy-Rogers, TEP
A recent article by Reuters reported on the first known use of AI-generated video to re-create a likeness of a deceased victim in a courtroom. The video avatar of Christopher Pelkey read a victim impact statement to the Superior Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. Christopher’s sister created the avatar and wrote the dialogue, though artificial intelligence (AI) is also capable of generating a script independently. As society continues to grapple with the rapidly evolving nature of AI, the concept of re-creating deceased individuals through video avatars fuels growing concerns over the ethics and appropriateness of using AI in a legal context.
Use of AI-generated videos in estate administration and estate litigation
The use of AI in the courtroom of a criminal proceeding potentially opens the door to its use in other areas of the law, including trust and estate administration and litigation. While many individuals leave behind handwritten letters (or even some pre-recorded videos) to explain the reasoning behind their estate plan, it is conceivable that AI could be used to generate a video of a likeness of the deceased to provide a visual explanation of their wishes and estate planning decisions in more vivid terms. This may be more impactful to (and more readily-accepted by) the beneficiaries and other surviving family members, than a handwritten letter, or if no letter was left, than the plain text of the Will.
If visual depictions of the deceased are more moving or impactful, then AI-generated avatars or other videos may be useful to provide context to decisions such as why a trust was set up in a specific way, or why an estate was divided unequally between beneficiaries. It is possible that these videos could help loved ones find closure and reduce the likelihood of a contested estate by offering a compelling explanation of what the deceased truly wanted. AI could also prove useful in ongoing estate litigation, with videos being used during a mediation to emphasize the deceased person’s wishes, or sway another party’s emotions.
Although the avatar of Christopher Pelkey was well-received by Judge Lang in Court, the use of this technology raises significant concerns. AI-generated videos have the potential to cause emotional distress to loved ones, particularly if an avatar does not accurately depict the deceased, or perhaps more so if the avatar depicts the deceased too accurately. There is also the concern that this technology could be abused as it becomes more accessible. As AI videos advance, they will become more difficult to distinguish from authentic media and parties in a dispute may be tempted to mislead one another with AI-generated content. Legal professionals will have to consider proper safeguards when choosing to incorporate AI into their practice.
Recent developments in AI have gained considerable attention for their utility, though the ethics and appropriateness of using AI in law remain something to be sorted. We must be mindful of the risks it can carry, especially in the context of sensitive matters such as those dealt with in estate administration and estate litigation. If you are seeking guidance on an estate or trust matter, including the potential for use of AI-generated video or avatars in estate matters, please contact Zachary Murphy-Rogers or any member of our Estates & Trusts Group.
