
TL;DR: The Bottom Line for Legal Teams
ChatGPT creates serious risks for legal work. Enterprise legal AI platforms deliver specialized capabilities, enterprise security, and attorney-client privilege protection that general AI tools simply do not match. Legal teams need purpose-built solutions, not consumer chatbots.
ChatGPT was never designed for legal work. Period. As someone who spent years as a General Counsel before joining the legal technology space, I've seen what happens when legal teams try to force-fit general tools into specialized workflows.
The fundamental problem: ChatGPT is a predictive text engine that generates plausible-sounding responses. "Plausible" is not the same as "accurate" in legal contexts.

Key risk factors:
Sam Altman's recent comments about ChatGPT have created confusion in our industry. Here's what every legal professional must understand:
When individuals use ChatGPT for legal questions, conversations receive no attorney-client privilege protection.
This applies regardless of platform security or how legal the AI responses sound. The privilege does not exist because:

Writing in a private diary creates no privilege because no lawyer receives the information. Inputting data into AI chatbots lacks the attorney-client relationship required for privilege.
Bottom line: I would never have a ChatGPT conversation I wouldn't want discovered in litigation.
When lawyers use specialized AI tools while representing clients, the analysis changes completely.
This includes:
Using third-party technology that accesses confidential client information does not waive attorney-client privilege when lawyers take reasonable precautions to prevent unauthorized disclosure.
Courts have established this principle for email, legal research tools, and cloud storage. Privilege remains intact with proper safeguards.
Unlike ChatGPT or basic automation tools, enterprise legal AI platforms operate with sophisticated agentic architectures.
These platforms don't respond to prompts. They:

This isn't a chatbot with legal training. These are intelligent platforms designed for how legal work gets done.
Enterprise legal AI platforms provide comprehensive risk visibility through specialized legal models.
Key capabilities across the industry:
This level of specialized risk management is impossible with general-purpose AI tools.
Enterprise legal AI platforms excel at workflow orchestration that extends beyond legal departments:
Enterprise legal AI platforms don't use public ChatGPT interfaces for client information. They maintain direct, enterprise-level data agreements with major AI providers like Microsoft, Anthropic, and OpenAI.
Enterprise data handling standards:
The nature of enterprise legal work is fundamentally different from ChatGPT conversations.
To preserve confidentiality while using enterprise AI assistance:
Lawyers waive privilege if they share AI-generated information inappropriately, use public sharing features, or fail to implement reasonable security measures. The same waiver rules that apply to any legal work still apply.
ChatGPT may appear cost-effective initially. Total cost of ownership becomes problematic when factoring in:
Enterprise legal AI platforms typically offer:
Leading enterprise legal AI providers offer hands-on, consultative support backed by ecosystems of legal consultancies focused on customer success.
Enterprise AI platforms adapt to organizational needs with focus on delivering positive outcomes, not features.
Having been a General Counsel myself, I understand the difference between tools that work in demos versus tools that work in practice.

The legal AI regulatory environment has evolved significantly in 2025:
The legal AI market has matured beyond basic automation:
Successful enterprise legal AI implementation requires:
Key performance indicators for legal AI:


ChatGPT, while impressive for general applications, simply isn't designed for serious legal work. The specialized nature, security considerations, compliance requirements, and tailored functionality of enterprise legal AI platforms make them indispensable for professional legal practice.
The stakes are too high for both client service and professional liability to rely on general-purpose tools for specialized legal work.
As someone who's experienced this transformation from both the client and vendor perspective, the difference between purpose-built legal AI and adapted general tools is dramatic and decisive.
The question isn't whether AI will transform legal practice (AI already has). The question is whether you'll choose tools designed for legal excellence or risk your practice on consumer-grade alternatives.
Jerry Levine serves as Chief Legal Officer at Leah and brings over 20 years of legal experience, including extensive tenure as General Counsel. He specializes in legal technology implementation, AI governance, and enterprise legal operations transformation.
Jerry's unique perspective comes from experiencing the evolution from frustrated legal technology user to advocate for purpose-built legal AI solutions.
Connect: LinkedIn
Ready to explore how enterprise legal AI transforms your legal operations?
Key next steps:
Choose purpose-built platforms over general AI tools for serious legal work.