Explains privilege and work product in plain terms and why the Heppner court found chats with public Claude were not privileged.
The Rules of Privilege Still Apply When Lawyers use AI
Harvey Sep 2026
Open harvey.ai →No. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled in February 2026 that a fraud defendant's chats with the public version of Claude were not privileged: Claude is not a lawyer, he used it on his own rather than at his lawyers' direction, and its privacy policy gave him no reasonable expectation of confidentiality. The FBI had seized about 31 documents recording those chats. Sam Altman made the same point about ChatGPT in 2025: there is no legal confidentiality for those conversations. Use AI to understand terms and prepare your questions, but tell the facts of a dispute, a police matter or a divorce to your advocate, not to a chatbot, and assume anything you type could one day be read out in court.
On the AI map, 29 October 2026 AI assistants AI browsers Avatars and voice
6 resources.
Explains privilege and work product in plain terms and why the Heppner court found chats with public Claude were not privileged.
Harvey Sep 2026
Open harvey.ai →The facts of the Heppner case, the judge's three reasons and the 31 seized documents, told for a general reader.
The Next Web Apr 2026
Open thenextweb.com →OpenAI's own chief executive saying ChatGPT conversations lack the protection you get with a doctor, therapist or lawyer.
TechCrunch Jul 2025
Open techcrunch.com →Shows why a consumer chat is not confidential in the legal sense: chats can be used for training or reviewed when flagged.
Anthropic Mar 2026
Open privacy.claude.com →Even a Temporary Chat may be kept up to 30 days, and deleting a chat is a separate step from turning off training.
OpenAI Oct 2026
Open help.openai.com →A running list of court cases where AI-made-up citations reached a judge, a reason to check any legal answer with an advocate.
Damien Charlotin 2026
Open damiencharlotin.com →