This week we are joined by Brandon Wiebe, General Counsel and Head of Privacy at Transcend. Brandon discusses the company’s mission to develop privacy and AI solutions. He outlines the evolution from manual governance to technical solutions integrated into data systems. Transcend saw a need for more technical privacy and AI governance as data processing advanced across organizations.

Wiebe provides examples of AI governance challenges, such as engineering teams using GitHub Copilot and sales/marketing teams using tools like Jasper. He created a lightweight AI Code of Conduct at Transcend to give guidance on responsible AI adoption. He believes technical enforcement like cataloging AI systems will also be key.

On ESG governance changes, Wiebe sees parallels to privacy regulation evolving from voluntary principles to specific technical requirements. He expects AI governance will follow a similar path but much faster, requiring legal teams to become technical experts. Engaging early and lightweight in development is key.

Transcend’s new Pathfinder tool provides observability into AI systems to enable governance. It acts as an intermediary layer between internal tools and foundation models like OpenAI. Pathfinder aims to provide oversight and auditability into these AI systems.

Looking ahead, Wiebe believes GCs must develop deep expertise in AI technology, either themselves or by building internal teams. Understanding the technology will allow counsels to provide practical and discrete advice as adoption accelerates. Technical literacy will be critical.

Listen on mobile platforms:  ⁠Apple Podcasts⁠ |  ⁠Spotify⁠ | YouTube (NEW!)

Contact Us:

Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@gebauerm⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@glambert⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠
Threads: @glambertpod or @gebauerm66
Voicemail: 713-487-7821
Email: geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com
Music: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Jerry David DeCicca⁠⁠⁠⁠

Transcript

Continue Reading Observing the Black Box: Transcend’s Brandon Wiebe’s Insights into Governing Emerging AI Systems (TGIR Ep. 218)

Dentons Nextlaw LabsMaya Markovich understands that rational lawyers would observe market dynamics and client pressures to weigh the costs and benefits of adapting their behaviors to survive change, stay employed, and make their work more fulfilling. But, people don’t always make rational decisions. And, law firm’s economic structure incentivizes lower efficiency as a method of obtaining higher revenue. 
Wordrake‘s Ivy Grey thinks that firms need to stop thinking of short-term gains at the expense of necessary long-term changes that will help lawyers create more value with their time. This shift really helps clients with their overall legal needs, not just the immediate need.
Join us as we walk through issues of change management, behavioral science, ethical fading, and legal industry business models and where Markovich and Grey believe the industry is headed in the not too distant future.
Check out Maya and Ivy’s three-part blog series:

Apple Podcasts LogoApple Podcasts | Overcast LogoOvercast | Spotify LogoSpotify

Information Inspirations
It’s the legal innovation’s Oscars time of the year. Many of our friends and colleagues have made the list of this year’s Fastcase50 and College of Law Practice Management Fellowships. Congrats to them all!!
Legal Innovators have some habits they need to change. Victoria Hudgins addresses those in her article on CIOs Reveal 4 Mistakes Every Law Firm Innovation Leader Should Avoid.
Speaking of bad habits, Zack Needles discusses the very bad habit of law firms who want to bring in the hot new CINOs (Chief Innovation Officers) to help advance innovation within their firms, but cannot see past the yearly budget, revenues, and profits to let the innovators try things that may fail before they succeed. Needles worries that this will cause a revolving door for CINOs with little chance of being given enough room to actually bring about innovative change in the firms.
Listen, Subscribe, Comment
Please take the time to rate and review us on Apple Podcast. Contact us anytime by tweeting us at @gebauerm or @glambert. Or, you can call The Geek in Review hotline at 713-487-7270 and leave us a message. You can email us at geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com. As always, the great music you hear on the podcast is from Jerry David DeCicca.
Transcript

Continue Reading The Geek in Review Ep. 124 – Maya Markovich and Ivy Grey on Creating More Value with the Time You Have

Ryan has previously waxed poetic about how some mandatory bars are imposing odd and counterproductive ethics rules and opinions.

This topic resurfaced for me recently as I have been asked to present to a futures committee of a mandatory bar in November. They are wanting me to give them a picture of all that is

Puzzle me this: If a lawyer conversed with a client in front of a law enforcement representative, would the conversation be privileged?

Answer: No.

Conversations held in the presence of any third party, let alone one representing the government, would constitute a waiver of privilege.

Previously on 3Geeks (and perhaps too many times) we have

Image [cc] Bark

Awhile back I posted on how I thought lawyers using Gmail (or any other free email service like that) constituted a waiving of privilege. My argument was that agreeing to share privileged client communications under “a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive licence” with a third party was on its face –

One of the very first things you hear when you attend a Competitive Intelligence (CI) seminar is that CI is the ethical gathering of intelligence. The reason that ethics is stressed so highly when discussion CI, is that if your CI team is dabbling in unethical behavior (and that gets exposed), it reflects upon your whole organization