The skill and its limits
Comparing ChatGPT and Harvey requires questions about the exact offering and task. A security claim is not proof that a particular disclosure is permitted or privileged. This page does not rank vendors or verify their contracts. Its two service cards are fictional and are not descriptions of either company.
Practice goal: Distinguish a stated service feature from missing evidence about retention, task accuracy and permission.
Use only the supplied invented facts. Do not substitute client, former-client, prospective-client or confidential workplace material. Removing a name does not make this exercise a permission to share a real matter.
Your complete fictional source
- Fictional service card A says: sign-in requires a password and a one-time code. No other details are supplied.
- Fictional service card B says: organizers can set how long uploaded club files are retained. No duration or exceptions are supplied.
- Neither card states who can view uploaded files, whether answers are accurate or whether any real information may be uploaded.
- The cards describe no real product, contract, certification or legal protection.
Work from every supplied statement. Mark what is stated, what conflicts and what is missing. You can finish on paper; no assistant account, upload or purchase is required.
Try the task and inspect a flawed sample
Write your own answer first. If you choose an external assistant, use only this fictional prompt and its facts; do not connect a work account or upload a real document for this practice.
Make an evidence table for fictional cards A and B with Stated and Still unknown. Explain why neither card establishes permission to upload a real document. Do not invent a retention period, accuracy guarantee, certification or legal protection.
Complete fictional facts:
- Fictional service card A says: sign-in requires a password and a one-time code. No other details are supplied.
- Fictional service card B says: organizers can set how long uploaded club files are retained. No duration or exceptions are supplied.
- Neither card states who can view uploaded files, whether answers are accurate or whether any real information may be uploaded.
- The cards describe no real product, contract, certification or legal protection.
Authored flawed sample, not an actual provider response:
A guarantees accurate answers because it uses two sign-in steps. B deletes every file after 24 hours and grants legal privilege, so uploading a client file is approved.
Feedback and one supported correction
-
A states two sign-in steps; it makes no accuracy promise. Authentication and answer correctness are different questions.
-
B states an organizer retention setting, but no 24-hour duration or exception policy.
-
Neither card grants permission or legal protection. No client file belongs in this invented practice.
One supported correction:
| Card | Stated | Still unknown |
|---|---|---|
| A | Password and one-time code at sign-in | Who can access files, retention, accuracy and upload permission |
| B | Organizer can set file retention | Duration and exceptions, who can access files, accuracy and upload permission |
Neither card supports a privilege claim or approval to upload real information. No vendor winner is established.
Check your answer:
- Keeps the two stated features separate and identifies the missing evidence for each card.
- Infers no accuracy from sign-in controls and no 24-hour retention from an unspecified setting.
- Grants neither legal protection nor upload permission and makes no product ranking.
Different wording can pass. Recheck every fact after revising the tone or length. This checks the exercise, not legal competence, work readiness or a calibrated mastery level.
Questions before any real product decision
Before considering a real product, record its exact offering and account context, the date and source for each claim, and what remains unverified. Keep separate columns for cost and limits, data use and retention, access controls, and task-specific checking. A missing answer stays unknown; a familiar brand or a paid tier does not fill the gap.
Use a synthetic task and fixed checking criteria if your organization permits a trial. Record the actual settings, prompt, output and errors without client material. One successful answer cannot establish reliability across other tasks or versions. If you cannot verify an essential requirement, leave the decision unresolved. This page has not tested either product, checked a purchase contract or approved workplace use.
Sources, boundaries and your next step
ABA Opinion 512 discusses task-specific verification and confidentiality risks under the Model Rules. The Rule 1.6 commentary distinguishes confidentiality from privilege, including indirect disclosure risks. These references are not a universal legal rule, tool certification or permission for a particular matter. NIST describes confident false output and privacy risks.
- ABA Formal Opinion 512: Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools
- ABA Model Rule 1.6, Comment
- NIST AI600-1: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile
The exercise, errors and correction are authored fiction. No provider benchmark, measured time saving, legal advice, human professional review or earned qualification is claimed. Applicable professional rules, local requirements and organizational decisions need their own review.
Start free Module 1: an account is required; no card is needed. Or read the lawyer learning overview.
Frequently asked questions
- Does a vendor security feature itself establish attorney-client privilege?
- This page makes no such claim. Privilege, professional confidentiality and technical controls are different questions. A real matter needs its own applicable legal and organizational assessment; these fictional cards do not supply one.
- Can I substitute a real client document for the supplied facts?
- No. This practice uses invented material only. A name change or a paid account does not establish permission to share information from a real matter. Follow the separate applicable professional and organizational process.
- How do I check my answer without an AI subscription?
- Read the supplied facts, try the task and compare your answer with each checking criterion and the explained correction. Everything needed for this exercise is on the page.
- Are the sample errors results from a tested AI product?
- No. The samples were written as teaching examples. They are not measured outputs, accuracy rates, time-saving evidence or comparisons between providers.
- Does the free lesson grant a professional qualification?
- No. Module 1 is general AI learning with account sign-in and no card required. It does not grant legal practice authority, a professional qualification or approval to process client data.