Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
A federal judge ruled that prosecutors can compel OpenAI To hand over ChatGPT account records belonging to Richard Kim, former CEO of cryptocurrency startup Zero Edge, as part of a fraud case Claiming that he transferred investors’ money In cryptocurrency trading and online gambling.
Prosecutors allege that Kim transferred about $3.8 million from Zero Edge’s $4.3 million fundraising round, and that he used it after his arrest. ChatGPT To research his case, including his trial strategy. Court filings indicate that Kim may also have used artificial intelligence to create numerous claims related to the misappropriation of investor funds, cryptocurrency trading, and gambling. Kim has pleaded not guilty to securities and wire fraud charges.
U.S. District Judge Lorna Schofield on Monday rejected the defense’s attempt to protect chatbot data, asserting that AI chat logs could be treated as third-party digital evidence subject to a search warrant. The warrant seeks Kim’s OpenAI records from October 2023 through May 2026, including claims, responses, and account information.
This case is a reminder that conversations with AI-powered chatbots can become part of a legal record. As more people use tools like ChatGPT for personal research and advice, courts are starting to treat AI conversations like other digital records, such as emails, texts, and search history. This also means that using a chatbot for legal research does not automatically make the conversation private or protected.
Can a chatbot be protected by attorney-client privilege?
Kim’s lawyers tried to block the search warrant, arguing that the chatbot data contained privileged information and research related to the case. According to the defense, those digital records must be protected, because they will reveal Kim’s inner thoughts, defense tactics and trial strategy.
Plaintiffs countered that for attorney-client privilege to apply, the conversation must be confidential between a human being and a licensed legal professional for the purpose of obtaining legal advice. An AI chatbot cannot be a lawyer.
Schofield’s ruling does not specify whether Kim’s ChatGPT records are protected by attorney-client privilege, but it allows the arrest warrant to proceed, meaning the defense cannot prevent OpenAI from complying. Kim may continue to challenge specific records after that.
The dispute adds to a growing legal question about whether conversations using tools such as ChatGPT, twin or Claude They can remain private when used for legal research.
This ruling is in line with a landmark decision issued earlier this year United States v. Hebnerwhere another Manhattan judge found that the defendant’s exchanges with Anthropic’s Claude chatbot were not protected by attorney-client privilege or work product protections.
In that case, US District Judge Jed Rakoff said the AI platforms are third-party data collectors, not legal counsel. He noted that the defendant used Cloud without the guidance of his lawyer and that the platform’s privacy terms weakened any claim that the chats were confidential. The use of lawyer-directed AI could be approached differently, Rakoff said.
Future cases may draw clearer lines about when AI-powered legal work can be protected, especially if a chatbot is used at the direction of a lawyer.
It’s not quite a digital version of your Miranda rights, but the caveat here is similar: anything you write can (and will) be used against you in a court of law.
(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, the parent company of CNET, sued OpenAI in 2025, alleging that it infringed Ziff Davis’s copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.)
