I think it should probably be the same fee, AI is great but you still need a good orchestrator to use AI today to verify the information. If you're using AI as a lawyer you're well ahead of the pack and will most likely have better results.

As a lawyer, I used to tell clients, I can answer that question but is it worth giving me a flat screen TV for it? That was an effort at fee transparency and encouraging efficient use of my tine. So with AI, all buyers now need to be running preliminary questions, and maybe even basic documentation, through AI before engaging their lawyer. All experienced lawyers that charge based on experience are charging for pattern matching - what they've seen or read go wrong on deals before. AI is a better pattern matcher than the most experienced lawyer, because it has seen more patterns and has perfect memory. If legal fees aren't coming down yet, they will because clients will be doing more of the work through AI and there's an oversupply of lawyers. I give it less than five years before there's a state bar recognized AI service that completely replaces human lawyers, with service fees being split between that state and the platform (probably Wyoming or Nevada), and then it's a race to the bottom on legal fees.