In his article February Illinois Bar Journal article, “Crafting an Effective Generative AI-Policy,” Carlos Cisneros notes that among the risk factors of using generative online artificial intelligence tools are whether content entered into a generative-AI tool’s prompt becomes the property of the AI company and whether confidential and biometric information is protected after being entered into an AI system. With this in mind, Cisneros recommends that lawyers should verify whether use of AI is covered by their malpractice insurance policy.

 In his fifth and final article in his five-part Illinois Bar Journal series on trial advocacy, Gino L. DiVito focuses on the losing argument, which he says possess a unique status within trial advocacy. In his article, “What I Learned From Teaching Trial Advocacy: The Closing Argument,” published in the IBJ’s February issue, DiVito writes, closing arguments “occupy the climactic arguments in books, plays, movies, stories, and real trials. But persuasion does not magically occur based on the power of closing arguments. If you haven’t done the job of persuasion from the opening gun—if, during the other parts of trial, jurors haven’t accompanied you on the road toward victory—persuasion is unlikely to result from your closing arguments. … Nonetheless, closing arguments deservedly earn the mystique they generate.”

 The Public Interest Law Initiative (PILI) is hiring for an Attorney Program Manager. Under the leadership and supervision of the Managing Attorney, this is a full-time position based in Southern Illinois.

 In a roundup of two recent Illinois State Bar Association CLE programs, the Illinois Bar Journal’s February cover story, “Artificial Intelligence and the Authentic Attorney,” observes that just as an attorney’s time is well spent considering the benefits and drawbacks of AI, the same can be said for keeping in mind best practices for communicating clearly and effectively with clients and colleagues.