so your process of getting legal advice is:

1. ask chatgpt, which will output convincing blob of text, with references and sources that might or might be not real, relevant, or make sense, some of which you won't be able to judge
2. then, ask a real lawyer about this, which means that they have to make sense of the situation on their own but also dig through machine generated drivel, which means that they need more time for that, and this means extra cost/wasted effort

how does that simplify anything

You understand that getting a list of sources and checking them is easier than finding them on your own, right?

that's one weirdass assumption. when you know what are you looking for, the opposite is true. few months back i've authored a review chapter in my (very narrow) field, and while "getting a list of sources" part took maybe a day or two with a few scopus searches, combing through them, finding out what's relevant and making a coherent story out of all of this was harder and took more time. if you don't know where even to start, maybe you should ask a professional? especially when alternative is just going in raw into the court of law, defending whatever is at stake with a few paragraphs of possibly nonsensical spicy autocomplete output