Remaking News of the Week: BigLaw firms diverge over entering legal tech market

Today Remaking News of the Week features a piece on BigLaw firm differences over entering the legal tech market. I’d phrased issue more as a question of ‘Whether’ or ‘How’? Here are snippets with the link to the full piece at the end. In my opinion, every BigLaw firm needs to have a view on this issue. 

Rhys writes “As the boundaries delineating law firms and legal tech providers begin to blur, a debate is swirling over how much mingling is good for business. Or, as some believe, bad for business.”

In recent time, BigLaw firms have started nurturing legal tech startups, including help with tool design, equity investments, incubating, and launching their own LawTech operations. Yet while many believe legal tech plays a vital role in the delivery of legal services and the future of the legal market, some are questioning just how close is too close when it comes to law firms supporting technology businesses.

For example, Shruti Ajitsaria, head of Fuse at Allen & Overy (featured on Dialogue here) told Legaltech News law firm investment in AI contract review platform Luminance “really hampered them. I haven’t seen them get the same traction as RAVN and Kira. Other law firms don’t want to use technology that is in part held by another law firm.” But Luminance has refuted this saying “Luminance has 140 customers, including very big law firms around the world, some of which may consider themselves competitors of Slaughter and May.”

Bad for Business? Firms Diverge Over Entering Legal Tech Market was published in Legaltech News March 25, 2019 written by Rhys Dipshan.