Remembering TCPaul, 2016-2019

Contract Review Automation

https://www.lawgeex.com/ Contract Review Automation La whiteguyinchina12/08/18
ouch. whiteguyinchina12/08/18
I am not someone who thinks that AI wont affect law in a maj superttthero12/08/18
I agree with you that AI affects law in a major way. I am n jeffm12/08/18
I’m all for such automation... by the opposing side. It dingbat12/08/18
i think it will look like this, a caste lawyer society. t whiteguyinchina12/10/18
And a bunch of low-grade monkeys will think it’s a great i dingbat12/10/18
"if your job is routine or boring or a monkey could do it, l jeffm12/10/18
I have heard you can make a business out of legalzoom messup ohboy12/10/18
I’ve even seen ones written by lawyers that were completel dingbat12/10/18
I've never seen any LegalZoom documents, but the point is th jeffm12/10/18
The prediction I got from an engineer doing projects involvi ohboy12/10/18
Curious what automation means for biglaw. 1st -3rd year tran irishlaw12/10/18
There comes a point, though, where the bargaining power betw jeffm12/10/18
right, that is what it will do. reduce the effort involved. whiteguyinchina12/10/18
Clients don’t pay me for my documents, but for my advice. dingbat12/10/18
You're looking at it the wrong way. People like you will alw thirdtierlaw12/10/18
i think the approach will be, if it can be done, it will at whiteguyinchina12/10/18
They have already tried that with the "federal guidelines" f jeffm12/10/18
1st to 3rd year transactional work is because the client wan dingbat12/10/18
whiteguyinchina (Dec 8, 2018 - 6:41 am)

https://www.lawgeex.com/

Contract Review Automation

LawGeex Artificial Intelligence engine reads and analyzes incoming contracts, suggesting edits based on a company’s pre-defined legal policies. Contracts that meet these policies can be automatically approved within an hour. Contracts that don’t align with your policies are escalated for guided editing and approval.
Legal can maintain full control and mitigate risk while giving other departments the freedom they need to get business moving faster.
Fast turnaround - 80% time saved reviewing and approving contracts
Custom workflows to direct reviews and approvals to the right people
Increase efficiency between sales, legal, operations and procurement, unblocking contract bottlenecks
Support for a wide range of file types, including: doc, docx, pdf, and images
Enforce Your Legal Policies, Every Time

Bring your legal policies online. Easily define which clauses your business requires, what your acceptance criteria are, and what should be rejected. LawGeex AI will apply these policies to every incoming contract to ensure your business standards are followed every time.
Minimize legal risks by enforcing your legal policies consistently across every contract
Automate the approval or escalation of contracts to the right person
Capture and easily update your institutional legal knowledge in one place
Define your company’s standard language, fallback positions and more


Edit Your Contract Right in LawGeex

The LawGeex Action Center highlights any discrepancies between a submitted contract and your company’s policies, helping your contract team find and fix missing or problematic clauses. See your company’s default language and fallback positions for each clause to quickly and consistently red-line the contract within the platform.
Supports contract editing and red-lining
Issues and missing clauses clearly identified on your contract
Your company’s standard language and fallback positions readily available as you edit

Reply
whiteguyinchina (Dec 8, 2018 - 6:42 am)

ouch.

Reply
superttthero (Dec 8, 2018 - 11:57 am)

I am not someone who thinks that AI wont affect law in a major way, it already is.

However, a lot of what a corp attorney does is go between the other side and the business folk/experts.

That a computer can suggest edits doesn't mean they wont want an attorney validating those positions and then pressing the other side to agree.

Reply
jeffm (Dec 8, 2018 - 1:34 pm)

I agree with you that AI affects law in a major way. I am not inclined to think this means it is impeding the ability of attorneys to make a good living. The median annual income for attorneys has continued to rise. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/legal/lawyers.htm#tab-5 The number of attorneys also continues to rise. https://www.americanbar.org/about_the_aba/profession_statistics/

In many ways, the practice of law inevitably involves changes which are designed to maintain the ability of attorneys to make a living.

Before computers, a divorce decree was 2 pages. Now, look at them! *Somebody's* got to go through all that to make sure it's in conformance with the settlement/judgment. Often, time is spent reviewing it with the client, too.

Same goes for numerous contracts. They have become more verbose due to improvements in word-processing.

Also, the laws and rules have been changed to require more work as technology improves. For example, when a discovery dispute exists, many jurisdictions now require a "Certificate of Conference" (or similar document) in which the attorney must certify that he/she made a reasonable effort to resolve the dispute before requesting court intervention.

In addition, the level of bureaucracy has increased as technology has improved. Now, we have a myriad of regulations from cosmetology to wind and solar power. The maze continues to grow.

And as you point out, there is a world of difference between automating tools versus actual decision-making. The decision-making component is under much less threat.

Reply
dingbat (Dec 8, 2018 - 5:31 pm)

I’m all for such automation... by the opposing side.

It’s often quickly apparent when another attorney is an idiot, and I can screw them over in a myriad of ways without them realizing it. Automation will just make it worse. Programming is only as good as the person setting it up, and the best attorneys aren’t the ones doing this.

Reply
whiteguyinchina (Dec 10, 2018 - 3:52 am)

i think it will look like this, a caste lawyer society.

the small and middle sized business will conform to AI. there will be cost savings due to that, so whatever risk there may be will be worth the cost savings. courts will support this as an improvement. so even court decisions will be standardized.

the rich will always hire real lawyers and have their own contracts. so it wont matter.

it will probably come in waves. like doc review automation at first, with some human review of the initial scan. then less and less.

if your job is routine or boring or a monkey could do it, likely a computer program will be doing it in ten to fifteen years.

Reply
dingbat (Dec 10, 2018 - 9:45 am)

And a bunch of low-grade monkeys will think it’s a great improvement because they’ll have more free time

Reply
jeffm (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:05 pm)

"if your job is routine or boring or a monkey could do it, likely a computer program will be doing it in ten to fifteen years."

This is not true. I have seen countless attorneys, including me, get bored and feel our work has become routine. We start believing that our clients could do a lot of the stuff we do. This is just false.

There are some non-lawyers who could do some of our "menial" tasks such as writing a simple will. However, by and large, the vast majority of people cannot, and should not, do this. They don't have an appreciation for our language and what it accomplishes. It is very dangerous to assume our knowledge and experience doesn't add value.

I have seen some contracts people put together to run their businesses like, for example, a basic construction contract. They grab bits and pieces of stuff they see on the internet. They muck it up. By the end, it looks like a mess and can even include provisions where they hurt *themselves*. You should see what untrained people can do to indemnity and venue clauses, for example. They have no clue what this stuff is, and they mangle it.

AI will not replace lawyers.

Reply
ohboy (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:11 pm)

I have heard you can make a business out of legalzoom messups. Simple wills have already been automated to some degree. You make real money on the probate battles people fight. Battle lines are always drawn when someone dies.

Reply
dingbat (Dec 10, 2018 - 3:21 pm)

I’ve even seen ones written by lawyers that were completely mucked up.

I’ve seen the quality of legalzoom documents. Let’s just say sometimes nothing is better than something

Reply
jeffm (Dec 10, 2018 - 3:44 pm)

I've never seen any LegalZoom documents, but the point is that even if LegalZoom's documents were any good, how does an untrained person know?

I would never want to accept legal documents from any one who says, "This is not legal advice." This is the biggest red flag, but ordinary consumers don't appreciate it.

A better disclaimer *for the consumer* would be, "You should involve an attorney in this process." Of course, the free market isn't going to compel such a stark warning designed to protect uninformed consumers if it means you have to drive them away.

My advice to any attorney is to tell all your clients and potential clients when anyone puts a legal document in front of them and says, "This is not legal advice.", they need a lawyer.

Of course, we all realize that contracts of adhesion, such as website TOS and car loans, are everywhere. Nobody is going to go running to lawyers every time he encounters one. They, at least, need to think about the gravity of what can happen if something goes wrong.

For website TOS, using your information to send you marketing stuff is an inconvenience. Buying a lemon of a car can cause some financial strain. Buying a lemon of a house can screw you up kind of bad for a long time. Going into business can bankrupt you. You can't fix wills after you die.

Be aware of the gravity of the situation before signing anything you haven't read and fully understood. Always be on the look-out for, "This is not legal advice."

Reply
ohboy (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:08 pm)

The prediction I got from an engineer doing projects involving automation was that the masses of summer associates will continue to stagnate or dwindle and the small white shoe style firm will return. Law will likely remain a bunch of solos and small firms.

Reply
irishlaw (Dec 10, 2018 - 9:51 am)

Curious what automation means for biglaw. 1st -3rd year transactional work is largely plugging in new names and numbers from previous transactions...very little drafting.

Reply
jeffm (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:06 pm)

There comes a point, though, where the bargaining power between the parties to a contract is equal enough to where you have to customize contracts. That market will continue to exist.

I could see a nice tool consisting of a program detecting a "type" of clause, such as one for indemnity and then, offering various alternative clauses in a convenient way. That's the essence of it. Still, you need to realize that only a human can decide which clause works best for the parties.

Reply
whiteguyinchina (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:14 pm)

right, that is what it will do. reduce the effort involved. and then if there is a dispute, these standardized contracts can be interpreted in a standardized way, so that you just need the computer to look up cases with the similar type of agreement and fact pattern.

legal research will turn into quasi data science.

Reply
dingbat (Dec 10, 2018 - 3:26 pm)

Clients don’t pay me for my documents, but for my advice. I use automation so I can generate a two inch set of documents in two minutes. But if I give my intake form to a non-specialist, they won’t understand the important questions, let alone pick the right solution

Reply
thirdtierlaw (Dec 10, 2018 - 7:26 pm)

You're looking at it the wrong way. People like you will always be needed to both approve the final product as well teach the program the company's policies and fall back positions. The group of people who are going to get ravaged by these programs aren't the attorneys but the "contract specialists" and compliance people. Then as natural language processing gets better, the 1-3year transactional attorneys. You're already seeing this with major banks.

The bespoke trust and estate or tax practice isn't going anywhere. This is made to replace legal departments that create an immense amount of contracts per year that are fairly rote.

The major advantage to a program like this is the metadata created. As these major banks, businesses, etc. use these programs, the contracts all become standardize, at least in house. So they can create other programs to sort through these contracts to predict the effects of each contract in the overall scheme of the corporation. This should, hypothetically, help avoid situations like we saw in 2008 where banks were guaranteed to lose money regardless of what the market due to different departments/teams having contracted themselves into guaranteed overall losses.

Reply
whiteguyinchina (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:12 pm)

i think the approach will be, if it can be done, it will at least be tried.

of course it will not replace lawyers. but it will slowly eat into their work. reducing work in some areas and consolidating jobs.

like you could do it with sentencing. set up the criteria and have the computer search out every case with the same background. the judge can only overrule the computer if there is a valid reason.

which the judge will be intimidated to do. wait judge, you disagree with forty thousand similar decisions, since 1997, across all jurisdictions? pray, do tell us why.

Reply
jeffm (Dec 10, 2018 - 12:27 pm)

They have already tried that with the "federal guidelines" for sentencing. It's been in force long enough to where it has been widely criticized. I don't do federal, but I think I've heard that the "guidelines" are being slowly eroded in favor of discretion.

The problem is that there is no universal concept where one size fits all. We will always want to look for it because it would solve the inherent problems. However, the quest for the perfect contract is as elusive as the search for the perfect laws.

Reply
dingbat (Dec 10, 2018 - 3:22 pm)

1st to 3rd year transactional work is because the client wants the law firm’s reputation and malpractice liability

Reply
Post a message in this thread