Flag candidate synthetic or altered items in a production set
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- On a closed review set, list items whose metadata, pixels, or wording look inconsistent with the rest of the production, and quote the inconsistency. Do not label an item fabricated.
- What the lawyer must review
- Discovery scope is Rule 26(b)(1): relevant and proportional. Authenticity at trial is still Rule 901(a). The 17 May 2026 committee report said a deepfake amendment was not warranted yet, and that a bare claim of fabrication is not enough under the draft the committee is holding. You decide which items need an expert. Keep the production out of a public tool (Rule 1.6; Formal Opinion 512).
- Written for / version
- United States versionUS
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Check the specialist’s assumptions, qualifications and limits. Obtain the relevant expert or specialist review before relying on a technical conclusion.
- Preserve original files and relevant metadata. Document provenance and handling, and seek forensic review where authenticity needs to be resolved.
- Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.