"In 2026, the global legal technology circuit ushered in a landmark event: Kaye Law Firm, the world's No. 1 in annual revenue, announced that it would invest $500 million in its own AI platform in the next three to four years, a move interpreted by the industry as a signal that the top law firms regard the underlying technology as the core competitive infrastructure. Meanwhile, North American legal tech unicorn Harvey was valued at $11 billion, Europe's Legora was valued at over $5.6 billion, and Latin America's first legal tech unicorn, Enter AI, was born in Brazil. The global legal technology market is evolving rapidly, characterized by regional differentiation, track integration, and rule reshaping, while China leads the Asia-Pacific legal technology market with 44% of the region."

"For lawyers and law firms in China, this is not only a competition for technological upgrading, but also involves deep-seated legal issues such as data compliance, intellectual property ownership, and lawyers' practice responsibilities in AI applications. When legal technology evolves from an auxiliary tool to a business infrastructure, lawyers need to answer not u201cuse AIu201d but u201chow to use AI legally, compliantly, and responsibly.u201d This paper analyzes China's legal practice coping strategies under the global legal science and technology competition pattern from the perspective of lawyers."

"I. China's Positioning in the Global Legal and Technological Divided Landscape: Opportunities and Challenges Coexist"

"The North American legal technology market is driven by capital and efficiency. The US market is expected to reach 7.32 billion US dollars in 2026. Its ecological characteristics are that law firms and enterprises have extremely high acceptance of AI. Harvey has covered more than 60 countries and served more than 100,000 lawyers. In Europe, driven by strong regulations such as GDPR and the Artificial Intelligence Act, compliance automation has become the core driving force for market growth, and Sweden's Legora valuation of more than $5.6 billion confirms the market potential of compliance technology. The Asia-Pacific region is the fastest-growing legal technology market in the world. China leads the way with 44% of the region, and its application in electronic litigation, smart contract review, AI-assisted case handling and other fields has gradually matured."

"However, Chinese lawyers must clearly see that the global legal technology competition has shifted from single tool procurement to the self-construction and integration of knowledge assets, process data and AI platforms. Kay's $500 million investment means that the top law firms are building a technology moat, while Chinese law firms and lawyers may lose competitiveness in future cross-border business, international arbitration and compliance services if they stay only at the level of using SaaS tools. At the same time, Chinese legal science and technology enterprises also face legal risks such as cross-border data transmission and algorithm compliance in different jurisdictions during the process of going overseas, which is not only a challenge, but also a new opportunity for Chinese lawyers to provide professional services."

"II. Core legal risks in the application of legal science and technology: data compliance and intellectual property rights"

"The essence of legal technology is data-driven, and data compliance is an insurmountable red line for lawyers applying AI tools. China's Data Security Law and Personal Information Protection Law impose strict obligations on the collection, storage and cross-border transmission of legal data. When lawyers use Harvey, Legora or domestic legal AI platforms, they must review the data processing agreement of the service provider to determine whether client case information, trade secrets will be used for model training and whether data transfer to overseas is involved. If the law firm builds its own AI platform, it needs to establish a hierarchical data classification management system to implement special protection for data involving state secrets, trade secrets and personal privacy."

"Intellectual property ownership is another high-frequency point of contention. Who owns the copyright of AI-generated contract terms, legal opinions, and case analysis reports? China's Copyright Law does not currently clarify the copyrightability of AI-generated content. Judicial practice tends to believe that if AI-generated content reflects a person's substantial intellectual input, it can be regarded as a legal person's work or a post work. However, when lawyers use AI tools, they still need to clearly define the intellectual property ownership and scope of use of the generated content in the contract with the technical service provider. In addition, the legitimacy of AI training data is also worthy of attention. If the law firm uses crawled legal documents and judgment documents to train models, it may involve personal information protection and copyright infringement risks."

"III. The New Dimension of Lawyer Responsibility: Fault Identification and Ethical Boundaries in AI-Assisted Decision-Making"

"When lawyers rely on AI for legal searches, contract reviews, and even case forecasting, the criteria for determining liability are changing. China's Lawyers Law stipulates that lawyers should be diligent and conscientious. If a client loses money due to an error in the output of AI tools, can lawyers exempt themselves from liability on the grounds of "technical failure"? From the perspective of judicial practice, lawyers have a reasonable duty of care with the use of AI tools, and the final legal judgment cannot be completely left to the machine. For example, AI-generated case summaries may contain incorrect legal citations or misinterpretations of jurisprudence that lawyers must manually review."

"At the ethical level, attorneys' confidentiality obligations to clients are not exempt from the use of AI. If customer information is entered into the cloud AI platform, it will constitute a disclosure of confidential information, and prior consent must be obtained from the customer. The "Code of Practice for Lawyers" issued by the National Law Association clearly requires lawyers to take reasonable measures to protect client secrets, which includes carefully selecting technical service providers and signing confidentiality agreements. In addition, the algorithmic bias of AI may also affect the fairness of legal judgments. Lawyers should be vigilant about the possible systematic bias of AI tools in the search of class cases, especially in cases involving vulnerable groups, it is necessary to maintain independent judgment."

"IV. Response Strategies of Chinese Lawyers: From Tool Users to Rule Makers"

"In the face of the global wave of legal science and technology, Chinese lawyers should take the initiative to change from users of technical tools to participants and formulators of legal science and technology rules. First of all, the law firm should establish an internal compliance system for AI applications, including AI tool procurement evaluation, data security review, and codes of conduct for lawyers using AI. Secondly, lawyers need to improve their digital literacy, understand the technical principles and limitations of AI, and avoid blind dependence. Thirdly, China Lawyers Association and industry organizations should actively participate in the discussion of international legal science and technology rules and promote the establishment of Chinese standards for cross-border data flow and AI ethics."

"Guangdong Zhiming Law Firm has long paid attention to the integration of legal technology and lawyers' practice, and has accumulated rich experience in the fields of data compliance, AI intellectual property rights, and cross-border legal technology services. We recommend that corporate legal counsel and lawyers pay attention to the legal risks behind the tool while embracing the effectiveness of AI. Regardless of whether you choose an overseas legal AI platform or build your own compliance system, you should first conduct legal due diligence to ensure that the technology application meets China's laws, regulations and regulatory requirements."

"There is no end to legal science and technology, only depending on the place. In the global competitive landscape, Chinese lawyers must not only make good use of technology to improve service efficiency, but also adhere to the ethical bottom line and professional judgment of the legal profession. When AI can complete standardized legal work, the value of lawyers will be more focused on complex value judgments, risk taking and ethical responsibility - which is the irreplaceable core competence of the legal profession."