Since the explosion of large language models, there has been a lot of speculation in the law firm community whether or when you will be able to generate a sophisticated legal brief using AI.

We may have reached that point.

On October 28th, Peter Diamandis, the founder of XPrize, shared a post on X that referenced an AI-generated brief in a patent lawsuit.

This got widespread attention. AI isn’t just assisting in mundane tasks anymore; what used to cost clients $1,000 might, soon, just take five minutes and a couple of dollars in credits, no attorney involved. Diamandis is no lawyer, of course, but his suggestion that this level of efficiency could disrupt the traditional billing model in law is not wrong either. As AI’s capability continues to evolve, quality legal work will potentially become accessible at unprecedented speed and low cost.

This also means that lawyers have the rare opportunity to be at the forefront of this unprecedented technological shift if the industry plays its cards right. But what are the challenges to overcome before we get there?

Tomorrow is Coming Today

Diamandis’ post sparked a lot of different opinions, of course. Some commenters were concerned that making complex legal work this affordable might flood the courts with cases, leading to even worse wait times and delays due to high demand. Others wanted to believe we are entering a “post-credentialism” era of sorts, democratizing access to legal services in an unprecedented way. And some more were surprised that associates could even charge $1,000 an hour in the first place.

Whatever the case, this underscores a concern that has been brewing within the legal community: will AI actually make it easier to access quality legal work? Or will it just optimize certain tasks without changing how cases are ultimately resolved? Many responses stressed that if both parties in a dispute have access to similar AI tools, litigation may shift to focus on slight variations in strategy, where “fine-tuning” would become an essential part of the process.

And in cases with vast sums at stake like patent litigation, even a marginal advantage in brief quality or persuasiveness can be worth millions, so expertise in the law, prompt engineering, and AI-assisted strategy could become the new gold standard. However, so far, this is all hypothetical. All the ethical and strategic implications of this technology are unfolding, which makes it easy to overlook a bigger and more immediate issue. One which impacts the now and today of law firms.

Leaving Time in the Past

Diamandis’ post and the surrounding conversation highlight both an incredible technological leap and a warning for our industry. If AI can create patent briefs that are near human-level in quality, we’re standing at the brink of a shift that challenges the industry’s reliance on the billable hour model.

So far, hourly billing has been particularly suited to the unpredictable nature of legal work. Cases frequently evolve in unexpected ways, and billing by the hour accommodates this uncertainty by allowing firms to be flexible with their services. In litigation, for instance, the open-ended structure of hourly billing enables lawyers to adapt as necessary, assuring clients that their representation remains as thorough and responsive as the situation demands.

With AI, however, clients may soon be able to access high-quality legal services (in this case, the writing of a brief) in minutes rather than hours or weeks. And while this doesn’t mean lawyers will become obsolete, we will need to rethink how the economics of this job will work moving forward. The most likely scenario is that the industry will shift to “value-based billing” rather than “time-based billing”, which will test the flexibility and resilience of many law firms and practice areas. And from where we stand, it could look like this:

1. Outcome-Based Billing: Completing complex tasks in a fraction of the time it once took will pressure law firms to move towards a model where fees are tied to the quality of results, client objectives, or strategic gains achieved rather than the hours invested. This will effectively align legal fees with the stakes and outcomes of a particular case.

2. Hybrid AI + Expertise Billing: AI may handle drafting, research, and even some analysis, but lawyers will remain essential for overseeing, refining, and finalizing the work. A hybrid billing model might bill for AI-facilitated tasks at a lower, flat rate, while strategic consulting or high-stakes advisory work would command a premium. This approach could allow firms to balance accessible rates with the necessity of human expertise.

3. Subscription-Based Legal Services: As AI reduces the cost of producing high-quality legal work, firms may start offering subscription-based services where clients would pay a recurring fee to access predefined services and automated solutions, with a lawyer’s input only on critical points. This could work well for clients who need regular access to legal documents and advice, like contract reviews or intellectual property filings, at a predictable cost.

4. Fixed Fees for Defined Deliverables: With AI, the predictability of document preparation and case preparation timelines could allow firms to set flat fees for specific legal tasks, such as drafting a patent application or a brief. This fixed-fee model makes legal costs more predictable and aligns well with tasks AI can streamline, which clients will certainly find more appealing than hourly rates. Using the example of patent law above, AI-assisted drafting can enable lawyers to offer fixed rates for well-defined services where both parties have a clear expectation of the time and cost involved.

5. Premium Billing for Strategy and Specialized Advice: As AI handles more routine, research-intensive work, lawyers will focus on the strategic nuances AI can’t handle. Premium billing for these uniquely human elements (like strategy, negotiation, and tailored advice) could reflect a new billing tier in the legal market. Law firms may emphasize these high-value, irreplaceable contributions to clients, establishing a clear distinction between the cost of AI-driven processes and the higher fees for nuanced, human-led decision-making.

The Countdown Has Started

It’s easy to see why many are concerned about the future of the profession, but right now there is an opportunity to move ahead of the curve. The core issue here is that lawyers will need to reshape their value proposition and highlight areas where genuine expertise and strategic thinking remain critical. For those willing to lean into this shift, AI could be the key to both streamlining and elevating the value we bring to the table.

Now, you can make the argument that all of this is speculative, but if there is one thing that is almost assuredly not correct, it’s thinking that this doesn’t matter. LLM’s are improving by a factor of 10 every six months or so, so the question is not if that brief generated in 10 minutes is as good as actual legal briefs now, but the sure sign that in the relatively near future, they will become indistinguishable from work done by actual expert lawyers.

So, this moment is less about clinging to old methods and more about embracing a more homogenized and less lucrative future, especially if lawyers are not willing to adjust or reimagine a law firm’s place in it. A mistake that might, in short term, end up costing far more than just a few billable hours.