March 2026’s AI Launch Wave: What Lawyers Should Make of GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, Grok 4.20, GLM-5, MiniMax M2.5, and the DeepSeek Question
Lawyers should treat frontier-model launches the way they treat major appellate decisions: not as curiosities, but as signals. The firms and legal departments that follow these developments closely will help shape the next generation of AI governance standards, licensing terms, regulatory arguments, and liability theories. The ones that do not will inherit rules written by others. Staying informed on AI is no longer optional for lawyers. It is rapidly becoming part of competent practice.
Should AI Conversations Be Privileged? Balancing Privacy, Policy, and the Law
Users often treat these AI tools as advisors, sharing intimate details and seeking guidance. This raises a novel question, “Should communications with an AI be protected by a legal privilege, akin to attorney-client privilege or doctor-patient confidentiality?” Recent developments suggest courts are reluctant. A federal court in United States v. Heppner (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2024) held that conversations with an AI tool (Anthropic’s Claude) were not covered by the attorney-client privilege. Despite this landmark decision, there are arguments on both sides, doctrinal, ethical, policy, and practical, that are important to consider before this issue is decided.