In this case you can say "the contract we reviewed was poisoned via technical means to show different words, depending on how the file was read". Perhaps if pushed you can say you loaded it into GCAI/Harvey/Legora and read/reviewed it there.

There is no parallel construction where this wasn't deliberate & malicious, so it seems really high risk given the judge would rip you a new one if discovered.

You can't rely on the defense that the other party didnt read it, if you made it show different words depending on how it was loaded.