SLIDE 1:

Good evening, Dean and classmates! I will be reporting the existing laws on technologies for the country
assigned to me which is Singapore.

SLIDE 2:

The term Client in “client-facing” refers to the client in a client-solicitor relationship. There is a need to
protect clients as the technology is used to serve their legal needs. In particular, the focus is placed on
some of the most prevalent types of client-facing legal tech namely legal chatbots, self-service
automated document generation, and marketplaces.

SLIDE 3:

With regards to legal chatbot, let us first distinguish Legal information from legal advice. Although “legal
information” is not defined in Singapore law, the difference between legal information and legal advice is
that legal information involves stating a general point of law (i.e. what is the law), versus legal advice
which is concerned about the outcome of applying the law against the facts of a particular situation.

it is posited that identifying the line between legal advice and legal information depends on the
specificity of a response (from a lawyer or legally-trained person, or the “provider”), as guided by (i) the
input provided from the person seeking the legal advice/information (the “seeker”); and (ii) the nature
of any representation(s) made by the provider to the seeker.

As per its liability, there is no corresponding provision for legal information, even if the information is
wrong or inaccurate because even if the chatbot gives legal advice, the response from the chatbot may
fall under a lacuna in the law as there is presently no statutory provisions nor judicial precedents
governing legal advice from chatbots.

Nevertheless, an aggrieved user who had acted on the chatbot’s output could pursue a claim on other
legal bases, such as misrepresentation or tort of negligence.

SLIDE 4:

Automated document generation tools generally allow legal documents to be produced after a user
provides relevant information (often by answering a set of guiding questions). Such tools are often used
in two ways. First, a lawyer could use the tool to draft documents for her client. Second, a legal services
consumer could use the tool as a form of “self-service”, with the option of having a lawyer vet the
contract thereafter (usually with the payment of an additional fee). An examples of automated
document generation tools include Zegal and Contract Express.

Under the first scenario (where a lawyer uses the tool to draft software for her client), assuming that a
practitioner-client relationship exists, the lawyer must be diligent in her advice given to the client, even if
document automation software is used. Thus, it is likely that a lawyer using the software would be held
to the same standard of diligence in her advice given to the client.

However, the second scenario is remained unclear whether offering tools to generate their own
documents constitutes a provision of legal services. In short, unless a lawyer was specifically involved in
the drafting or vetting of the contract, it remains an open question whether the use of such automated
document generation tools is regulated by the LPA or the Legal Professional Act or the PCR or the
Professional Conduct Rules.

SLIDE 5:

Online marketplaces provide a platform for lawyers and law firms to advertise their legal services online.
This allows people who are looking for legal advice and/or representation to find lawyers using just one
platform. Prominent examples of such online marketplaces in Singapore are Asia Law Network and
SingaporeLegalAdvice.com.

The essential issue about online marketplaces is advertising legal services because Marketplaces are not
subject to the same standards as lawyers as provided in Professional Conduct Rules.

SLIDE 6:

This is actually a proposed law where social media sites could be blocked or fined in Singapore if they fail
to stop users in the tightly-controlled country from accessing "harmful" content.

It is where regulators can order social media platforms to block "egregious content" including posts
advocating violence and terrorism or depictions of child sexual exploitation.

Content that poses a public health risk or that is likely to cause racial and religious disharmony in
Singapore is also included.

Regulators can also order platforms to block a specific account from being accessed by users in
Singapore, but the orders will not apply to private communications.

Online communication services "with significant reach or impact in Singapore" may also be required to
introduce measures to prevent Singapore users, particularly children, from accessing harmful content,
without naming the platforms.

SLIDE 7:

In LAW ON PREVENTING FOREIGN INTERFERENCE IN DOMESTIC POLITICS, it allows authorities to compel

internet service providers and social media platforms to provide user information, block content and
remove applications used to spread content they deem hostile.

SLIDE 8:

In LAW ON COMBATING FAKE NEWS, It gives order to social media sites to put warnings next to posts
authorities deem to be false, and in extreme cases get them taken down.

SLIDE 9:

The Cybersecurity Act of 2018 establishes the framework for the oversight and maintenance of national
cybersecurity in Singapore and imposes duties and obligations on computer systems designated as
critical information infrastructure or the “CII”.
So, It operates alongside the Computer Misuse Act of 1993 which criminalizes certain cyber activities
such as hacking, denial of service attacks, infection of computer systems with malware, and other sector-
specific regulatory frameworks.

SLIDE 10:

The Singapore Government is one of many jurisdictions to have enacted laws to deal with fake news and
misinformation. The protection from Online falsehoods and Manipulation Act of 2019 or also known as
the “POFMA” became effective on October 2, 2019. So, this Protection from Online Falsehoods and
Manipulation Act of 2019 seeks to prevent the electronic communications of false statements of fact in
Singapore. In particular, it is an offense to make or alter an automated computer program with the
intention of using the bot to communicate a false statement of fact in Singapore.

SLIDE 11:

Lastly is the CMA or the Computer Misuse Act of 1993. So, although this Act is not specific to AI, the
CMA is the main legislation in Singapore that prescribes a list of criminal offenses relating to computer
material or services which may be relevant to AI systems.

Under this Act, a “computer” refers to an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other data
processing device, or a group of such interconnected or related devices performing logical, arithmetic, or
storage functions and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or
operating in conjunction with such device or group of such interconnected or related devices.

Here is the list of offenses that are included under this Act:

a. Unauthorized access such as hacking

b. Unauthorized obstruction of the use of computers such as denial of service attacks

c. Unauthorized modification of computer materials such as infection of IT systems with malware

d. Distribution, sale or offering for sale of hardware, software or other tools used to commit cybercrime;
and

e. the possession or use of hardware, software or other tools used to commit cybercrime.

SLIDE 12:

That will be all po, thank you!