This interview was conducted via video conference in Boston, Massachusetts, on November 7, 2024.

 

 

CY: In the rapidly evolving legal landscape, how do you foresee the role of AI in reducing or replacing human involvement in legal processes? What potential benefits and challenges do you expect for lawyers and students?

 

CR: Based on current AI reviews and quality standards, I don’t believe AI is quite there yet in terms of substituting a lawyer’s work. For instance, if you use ChatGPT and ask a question, you’ll likely notice that it now functions as both a chatbot and a search engine. Instead of creating a separate search browser, both functionalities have been combined. However, I don’t completely trust the results. It can be helpful for simple, everyday tasks, but the links and references it provides often don’t work, and the results aren’t always accurate. So, I just haven’t fully trusted ChatGPT or other AI solutions yet. While some are better suited for specific tasks, they are unreliable for everything.

AI doesn’t replace the need to study and acquire knowledge, especially in law, where details matter. How you interpret the law and how you write – even the placement of a comma – can make a significant difference in legal writing. AI can undoubtedly assist with research, but I believe it will be especially challenging for those in the paralegal profession. In short, we’re not there yet.

ChatGPT is already used in arbitration and courts, but human review remains essential. If the data it’s trained on is flawed, the results will also be flawed. For instance, if the data is biased – whether racially, gender-wise, or in terms of minority representation – do we want decision-makers relying on ChatGPT to make judgments? I don’t think so. Perhaps this will create an emerging role for lawyers: to understand how these systems work so we can challenge and contest the results they produce. Maybe the next career path for lawyers is to become the “AI breakers,“ stepping in and saying, “No, this result or judgment shouldn’t be valid.”

 

CY: How do you encourage your students to think critically about the ethical implications of technology in their legal studies?

 

CR: One of the exciting trends today is that many universities allow students to use ChatGPT, but they require attribution – making it clear that the work is not entirely your own but derived from ChatGPT. Transparency is a core value we all need to uphold. Transparency, attribution, and other ethical considerations are essential when using AI.

Another major discussion nowadays revolves around copyright issues. Specifically, who holds the copyright for the content fed into AI systems? It’s important to reflect on whether we agree with these practices, especially since many authors aren’t being properly recognized or compensated for the use of their work. There’s still considerable theoretical debate about whether this content should even be copyrightable. For instance, in the U.S., data itself isn’t protected by copyright, although databases are.

Boston University has a clear policy on AI usage, and it’s important to observe the guidelines set by universities. At the same time, the broader conversation about the ethical use of AI is critical because AI impacts so many areas of our lives – not just academia. I often ask questions like: Are you genuinely learning if you rely on ChatGPT to write a paper or compose an email for you? Using it to summarize something or assist with tasks you’re already working on is perfectly fine. But if ChatGPT is doing the work for you, that’s a different matter.

 

CY: From another perspective, using technology and AI-related products may prove detrimental to our privacy rights, particularly considering the vast amount of data collected and utilized by automated systems. Do you believe there will be a need for many lawyers specializing in privacy law?

 

CR: Both yes and no. In the wake of the Brussels Effect and the implementation of GDPR, most countries worldwide have adopted some form of privacy legislation. While many professionals already work in the field of privacy law, the evolving market and increasing demand call for even more expertise in this area. However, the critical question remains: Do we simply need more privacy professionals with a superficial understanding of technology, or should we focus on training privacy professionals to develop a deeper comprehension of the underlying technology?

This distinction is vital, particularly in fields such as AI, blockchain, and digital ID, where surface-level assessments often paint an overly optimistic picture. For instance, while the idea of universal digital IDs and accessible AI is appealing, the real challenges lie beneath the surface. These challenges are often referred to as the “black box” phenomenon, but the issue extends beyond that – it involves understanding the nuances of consumer interactions with these technologies.

For privacy professionals to excel, they must go beyond basic compliance and acquire a solid grasp of how technology collects and processes data and which data is being gathered. This deeper understanding is essential for ensuring both effectiveness and ethical integrity in their work. We must move past surface-level solutions and delve into the complexities to address the real issues.

I believe that we are at a critical moment when we should focus on building tech competencies in the legal and policy professions. But it’s not easy. Graduates in computer science or data science often follow a logical and structured path to develop a deep understanding of algorithms. Acquiring similar expertise can be particularly challenging for those outside these fields, such as legal professionals.

One of the critical obstacles lies in simplifying complex technical knowledge into more accessible, actionable insights. A practical approach could involve creating experimentation spaces like sandboxes that allow for hands-on learning. My research has explored the concept of operational and regulatory sandboxes, which enable professionals to experiment with and better understand technological systems in a controlled environment. While establishing AI sandboxes is particularly challenging – given the complexity of replicating systems that process vast datasets – I believe such efforts are invaluable for fostering a deeper understanding of these technologies.

At the very least, lawyers and policymakers must learn to ask the right questions. Adopting an inquisitive mindset is critical. For example, the “5 Whys” technique in product development can help uncover the root causes of issues through persistent questioning. This mindset – continuously probing “why” – is a valuable tool for navigating the complexities of technology.

 

CY: Given your extensive background in non-profit organizations, including the World Economic Forum, the UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees), and the UNDP (United Nations Development Program), as well as your experience providing legal advice to esteemed clients such as the DOS (U.S. Department of State), we would like to gain further insight into the challenges that shape your perspective on technology law. What recommendations would you give to young lawyers who will meet similar challenges in their professional careers?

 

CR: I think one thing is being prepared to work a lot. We all work hard already, but being ready to give a lot is essential, especially regarding networking. When I say networking, I don’t just mean saying hi to people at events. It’s about engaging in meaningful conversations and building something from those interactions. For example, after a meeting, always ask for three more contacts, follow up, plant seeds, and build partnerships. This is crucial.

Do not underestimate the importance of networking opportunities in international forums. For instance, I met individuals in Dubai who were based in Boston, and today, I reside in Boston. The relationships you build on a global scale can be incredibly impactful. For professionals working in technology, particularly those of us with international backgrounds, these global connections are not just beneficial but essential for fostering collaboration and advancing career opportunities.

Also, don’t discount new experiences. After completing my MEBA (Master’s in economics and business administration), I helped open my company’s mobile content and marketing department. Learning more about the business and developing business literacy and competencies was a great opportunity. This is important because much of technology is not neutral. How technologies are developed, managed, and deployed is often driven by business models, not necessarily the technology itself. So, building connections on the business side is important.

Be flexible and adaptable, as career paths can change. I’ve worked in the private sector, nonprofits, and universities, and I’ve done a lot of consultancy work, including with an intermediary in D.C. managing a project for the State Department. Make those connections and share your knowledge. Remember that while you’re reaching out to others for help, people may also contact you for assistance. So, be sure to dedicate time to helping others, too.

Throughout my career, I’ve recognized the lasting value of being part of professional communities. These networks evolve but remain integral. For instance, my early work with Creative Commons in 2003-2004 continues to connect me with professionals in new areas, such as data governance through the Data Sphere Initiative, a think tank I co-founded. Many colleagues I met in the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) community are now leading data protection and privacy efforts. Building and maintaining cross-community connections is essential for professional growth and making a meaningful impact.

All that to say look for fellowships, internships, or opportunities within those communities because they exist and can help you build meaningful relationships and career opportunities.

 

CY: Could you please provide some insight into the typical career paths that graduates of this program (IP LL.M.) tend to pursue, both in the private and public sectors? In addition, given your tenure at industry-leading technology companies, including Meta Platforms, Inc. (formerly Facebook, Inc.) and Telefónica, S.A., we would like to hear your thoughts on the experience of working for large private companies.

 

CR: As technology has specialized, these companies have also become specialized in how they think about their teams. I worked on the global connectivity team at Facebook, focusing on core connectivity infrastructure. At the same time, my background in telecommunications and broadcasting regulation was helpful in my work on the video products team at Facebook due to the intersection with broadcasting regulations.

There are numerous specialized teams in human rights, AI, extended reality (XR), and content development. Engaging with these teams can open doors to meaningful connections and opportunities. A simple approach, such as reaching out with a request for a quick conversation, can be highly effective. Throughout my career, I have succeeded by proactively connecting with others and seeking to give back through mentoring. Building relationships and exploring potential roles are essential steps in finding where you fit – or where you want to fit.

Equally important is pursuing work you genuinely enjoy, as this fosters intrinsic motivation and long-term fulfillment. Whether in a corporate, academic, or other environment, passion for your work helps sustain your drive and keeps you inspired, especially when you are surrounded by like-minded colleagues.

When exploring career opportunities, focus on companies that value diversity and hire globally. Companies like Facebook, Google, and Microsoft have teams worldwide – in San Francisco, Dublin, São Paulo, and beyond. Don’t limit your search to a single location like Washington, DC. Instead, examine hiring trends in different regions and reach out to professionals to learn about opportunities and build connections. These engagements can position you as a candidate for future roles.

Finally, success is a combination of hard work, strategic networking, and visibility. Many global companies also have country-specific teams as stepping stones to international roles. For example, I know colleagues who started on local teams like Google Brazil and transitioned to roles in global hubs like Google UK. Career advancement often involves exploring internal mobility within organizations and using different paths to achieve growth.

 

CY: What are your thoughts on the possibility of a foreign lawyer with an LL.M. degree from American universities pursuing a career in the U.S.? If you consider it a realistic career goal, what advice would you offer international lawyers who wish to practice law in the U. S.?

 

CR: One of the cons is that it’s a significant investment, both financially and in terms of time commitment. You’re paying for a new course, and while you may receive a scholarship, that’s not the case for everyone. It’s also a significant time commitment. In many countries, you can study and work at the same time, but LL.M. programs in the U.S. are generally full-time, especially the reputable ones.

A key challenge is that in the U.S., you can’t simply become a lawyer after completing an LL.M. You must take the bar exam, which isn’t available to all foreign-trained lawyers. Before deciding on an LL.M., it’s crucial to understand the requirements, including how many bar exams you may need to take.

Additionally, you must assess how difficult it will be to practice your profession in another country. Many foreign-trained lawyers end up working as paralegals because it doesn’t require taking the bar exam. And for some, that role is an even better job than what they had back home. So, becoming a paralegal is another path.

Another option is teaching. Many universities are hiring more and more faculty from other countries due to their international student base. Teaching might be a good alternative if you don’t want to work as a law firm lawyer or in-house counsel at a company.

It’s important to look for alternatives and assess which path makes sense for you. Be realistic about what is feasible with your resources. You need to clearly understand your goals, the resources at your disposal, and whether this path is realistic for you.

You will also need to negotiate with your family. Many international students come with spouses and children, so it’s important to get everyone on board and avoid future resentment. Do you have a support network? I believe that having this support is essential. That’s why you must be realistic about what you need to achieve and what you can achieve.

 

CY: In closing, what would be your final message for our readers?

 

CR: While thinking about tips, one important thing is to ask the LL.M. managers and recruiters tough questions. U.S. universities rely heavily on international students for funding and the sustainability of their programs. Don’t be afraid to ask the hard questions: Where are the alumni of this program now? Can I talk to some of them? What is the hiring rate for students graduating from this LL.M. program? You have the right to know these things, so ask the right questions.

It may sound challenging, but it’s totally achievable. That is perfectly fine if you decide not to remain in the U.S. after completing your LL.M. There are exceptional opportunities worldwide. However, make the most of your time in the U.S., whether it’s a year or longer. Take the opportunity to travel, build friendships, and enjoy the experience. The connections you form during this period, particularly with alums, will become invaluable assets in your professional network, so prioritize maintaining those relationships.

Above all, approach this journey with practicality and self-compassion. Prioritize your well-being and that of your family and confidently embrace the experience. Best of luck to everyone embarking on this path. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts – it was a pleasure.

 

CY: Thank you very much, Professor Rossini, for sharing your insightful perspectives with our readers. Your expertise on technology, law, intellectual property, privacy, and public policy is truly enlightening, and I am confident our readers will gain tremendous value from your reflections.