Legal Tidbit:
On September 12, 1958, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Cooper v Aaron that the school board of Little Rock, Arkansa, could not delay desegregating its school system by 30 months. The decision upheld the landmark Brown v Board of 1954, and further strengthened judicial supremacy as established in 1803's Marbury v Madison.
This Week:
- Apple and Google lose their EU fights
- Mergers, Mergers everywhere!
- Legal departments are reconsidering their use of AI
🧑⚖️ REGULATION
EU Crackdown
The European Union's Antitrust Chief, Margrethe Vestager, is celebrating two major victories this week.
In her first win, the European Court of Justice struck down a tax deal that Apple had with Ireland. And in the second, the court ruled against Google's anticompetitive practices.
"It was a win that made me cry because it is very important. …It's very important to show European taxpayers that once in a while tax justice can be done," Vestager said at a press conference in Brussels, reports Politico Europe.
The Apple case involved a tax arrangement the company had struck with Ireland in 2016, which Vestager argued gave the iPhone maker an unfair advantage over others. As Time notes, the Court ordered Ireland to reclaim roughly $14.4 billion in taxes (which accounts for about 2% of global Mac sales). The money has been sitting in an escrow account since the case began.
“We are disappointed with today’s decision as previously the general court reviewed the facts and categorically annulled this case,” a spokesperson for Apple said. CEO Tim Cook has also stated that the case is “total political crap.
Meanwhile, in the Google case, the European Court of Justice upheld a lower court's penalty against Google for antitrust violations. The 14-year-old case looked into whether Google favored its own online shopping links. The penalty totaled over $2.6 billion.
“She inherited a dead case, and she took a political chance based on whether it was worth it,” Christian Bergqvist, a law professor at the University of Copenhagen, told Politico. “There was a perception that you couldn’t do it, and she did it. …Europe was leading the way, at a time when U.S. antitrust agencies felt that they did not have sufficient political backing to go after Big Tech.”
US v Google
While the EU might have led antitrust investigations 14 years ago, today, the Justice Department is moving swiftly to investigate and try Big Tech.
Last month, a federal judge ruled that Google was in fact behaving as a monopoly in the search engine market. Now, the DOJ is going with state AGs on a new antitrust case against Alphabet: this one taking aim at it's ad business.
According to the AP, "the regulators contend that Google built, acquired and maintains a monopoly over the technology that matches online publishers to advertisers. Dominance over the software on both the buy side and the sell side of the transaction enables Google to keep as much as 36 cents on the dollar when it brokers sales between publishers and advertisers, the government contends."
Verdict
The political winds have changed since the late 2000s. Today, Silicon Valley is seen not only as economically dominant, but as a boogie man in both North America and Europe. As such, regulatory pressure has ramped up significantly against brand-name players like Apple, Alphabet, and the rest.
đź’Ľ INDUSTRY
Merger Fever
Law firm mergers are at a 20-year high. So says Kristin Stark, a principle at law firm consultancy Fairfax Associates. And it's clear to see why. Just this week, Womble Bond Dickinson (an AmLaw 100 firm) announced that it would combine with Lewis Roca (an AmLaw 200 firm) on January 1, 2025. The merger would create a 1,300-lawyer firm with about $750 million in revenue.
“Both of our firms recognize there’s a need to build scale, to have a deeper bench, in order to provide the type of legal services that our clients need, both in terms of skill set and also geographical reach,” Merrick Benn, chairman of Womble Bond Dickinson, told Bloomberg Law.
But they're not alone: Troutman Pepper and Locke Lord, as well as  Ballard Spahr and Lane Powell have also announced mergers.
So what's going on?
“Clients have been consolidating their outside counsel relationships largely in an effort to get volume discounts by giving more work to a smaller number of firms,” Jordan Abshire of Abshire Legal Search told Bloomberg. He added that firms are feeling pressure to reach clients in more places.
Performance
As Reuters notes, Big Law has had a banner year so far. "Revenue increased an average of 11.4% during the first six months of 2024 compared with the same period last year, driven by billing rate and demand growth," their reporting cites. "The top 50 highest-grossing U.S. firms had the strongest revenue growth at 13.8% in the first half of 2024, according to the survey results. The second 50 firms had 7% and the next 100 firms had 8.8% revenue growth. According to The American Lawyer trade publication, the top grossing U.S. law firm in 2023 was Kirkland & Ellis, with $7.2 billion in revenue."
Verdict
Big Law has definitely seen revenue growth this year, but firms who believe merging with another firm can help them catch up should be cautious of this strategy. Furthermore, clients are parsing out work to a smaller group of firms as well as relying more heavily on ALSPs.
🤖 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Wrestling With AI
A new report by Bloomberg Law is taking a look at legal departments' liability when it comes to AI use.
"Questions about corporate governance of AI have moved quickly from the hypothetical to the 'how,'" author Isabel Gottlieb writes. "Companies are seeking to determine appropriate standards and guardrails for using the technology responsibly, and also who should direct those governance efforts."
To solve for some of these issues, the report recommends complying with AI laws, enact internal standards within the company's workflow to stay ahead of laws, and vetting all AI tools and vendors before implementing them in the workplace.
“You need to figure out where, maybe, there are things to block,” said Sabastian Niles, chief legal officer at Salesforce, formerly at Wachtell Lipton. Furthermore, teams should be asking "where and how can that CLO facilitate the understanding of: What should we be enabling? What should we be doing?”
Gottlieb also recommends legal departments protect themselves with contracts when implementing AI systems—shifting the liability from themselves back onto AI developers.
As Daren Orzechowski, a partner at A&O Shearman, adds, "I think we’re in a window of maybe two-to-three years where there’s going to be a lot of churn within these deals—where, frankly, the terms that people are advocating for are all over the place,” he said. Orzechowski continued that AI contracts can take cues from blockchain and cloud computing contracts of recent years. “We can’t always wait and see,” Orzechowski said. “We have to figure out how to allocate the risk now.”
AI & E-Discovery
In addition to questions about liability, reporter Thomas Barce notes that "generative AI’s entrance into enterprise environments has created a new dimension of company information and potential liability that many organizations aren’t quite sure how to handle. Information governance controls are now required for an uncharted category of records—namely 'interactions,' which are logs of prompts used to query AI tools. New discovery rules and processes must be established for data categories that haven’t been discoverable, including interactions and company documents created entirely by a machine. Legal teams must now address governance and compliance, as well as e-discovery readiness, when implementing generative AI. They also must proactively map out policies for how employees may interact with these tools and where the underlying interactions are stored. This way, they can be properly retained, monitored for compliance purposes, defensibly disposed, and preserved as needed for future legal discovery requirements."
Verdict
It's clear that we are still at the beginning of the AI revolution. Moreover, that the inflated promise of AI is just that—inflated. But as the reality of this new technology sets in (and litigation and liability follow suit), it's important for legal departments to implement strategy now.
Be a smarter legal leader
Join 7,000+ subscribers getting the 4-minute monthly newsletter with fresh takes on the legal news and industry trends that matter.