Does anyone have experience vetting and implementing AI legal contract review solutions? In some research from Gartner, it seems they have identified a few vendors: BlackBoiler, Lawgeex, LexCheck, Legartis, Summize, etc. Wondering if anyone has experience - positive or negative - with any of these solutions?
Sort by:
In most of the cases, AI is reviewing clauses which are commercial in nature. I have not found any AI tools which ensure that the clauses are in in complience with the laws
My request with any of these is that some degree of manual human intervention for contract review should always be implemented and required at this time. Especially if in-house.
There are a number of consultants and implementation specialists that can help with reviewing and implementing these solutions. However, As Adina notes, you want to identify your specific needs and budget before proceeding any further with the search process.
This is a rapidly evolving industry with many new players and technologies. Ultimately, the best solution for your needs depends on your organization's specific use cases, budget, and preferences. For example, Spellbook uses GPT-4 for drafting and reviewing and has a Word add-in. LegalOn, Ironclad, and ContractpodAI also leverage Gen AI.
Adina, do you have any information you are willing to share with me on Shellbook? Sounds like it's going above and beyond others in reviewing/redlining agreements/contracts.
Hi Erin, You can request a free trial on Spellbook's website. I should add that in the last 6 months or so since my post, there have been many changes and updates in the market from both new and existing vendors. I'll echo Colin's post above that in a very overwhelming market, it often makes sense to work with a consultant/implementation specialist to help evaluate options and make a good choice.<br><br>This is one good recent (Dec 2023) independent matrix of existing vendors, but by now it is also considered "out of date": https://clm.innolawgroup.com/innolaw-clm-market-study-2023.<br><br>Gartner's 2023 Magic Quadrant for CLM report is also available via many CLM vendor sites.<br><br>Another note: Paxton AI, a legal research/drafting platform, also has an AI-powered contract analysis tool that includes editing and redlining. So there are many integrated worfklows available. <br><br>Happy to chat more!<br><br>
TL:DR I concur with my colleague Solab Khan.
Long version
I am an attorney but this is not legal advice and there is no attorney-client privilege. I mention being admitted to practice law to flag my bias toward having lawyers handle legal tasks, such as reviewing contracts. That being said, I glanced at the terms and conditions from one of the vendors mentioned. No, I did not look at all the terms and conditions, I just looked at one for fun. Reading terms and conditions for fun is another glaring indication that I’m a lawyer.
In any event, the “use at your own risk” terms and conditions seem better suited to a free online gaming platform than a tool determining your organization’s contractual rights and legal obligations. In contrast, “best efforts” clauses are more common for paid software. See an excerpt from the terms and conditions below, they selected all caps.
“NEITHER THE COMPANY NOR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THE COMPANY REPRESENTS OR WARRANTS THAT THE WEBSITE, ITS CONTENT OR ANY SERVICES OR ITEMS OBTAINED THROUGH THE WEBSITE WILL BE ACCURATE, RELIABLE, ERROR-FREE OR UNINTERRUPTED, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED” ...
The website also indicates “[t]hese Terms of Use permit you to use the Website for your personal, non-commercial use only” which lines up with a blanket indemnification (AKA hold harmless) clause for free online entertainment. To clarify, a hold harmless clause means Party 1 agrees that Party 2 is not responsible for anything, under any circumstances regardless of fault.
I recommend seeking the advice of competent counsel to evaluate potential contractual obligations, including contracts for software to evaluate contractual obligations.