Technically Legal - A Legal Technology and Innovation Podcast

Despite much ballyhoo and countless articles about them, alternative fee arrangements, or AFAs, have yet to gain widespread traction and the billable hour still reigns supreme for legal billing.

Enter the Leigh brothers, Scott and Digby, and their new legal tech startup, AltFee. The company’s stated goal is encouraging legal professionals to break free of hourly pricing and move to AFAs by using the app to help scope and price legal projects.

The brothers point out that the traditional billable hour pricing model doesn't provide certainty for clients and that AFAs will become more important with increasing use of AI which will likely reduce billable hours. They explain how Altfee offers a solution by providing a foundation for law firms to operate on an alternative fee model. The app helps users scope, price and audit their fees.

Scott and Digby also delve into the concept of 'value billing', explaining that it involves charging fees based on the value of the service provided to the client, rather than strictly on the time spent. They underline the importance of taking both task-based considerations and value-based considerations into account while pricing.

Learn more about Scott and Digby.

Things We Talk About in this Episode

Directory of Law Firms Offering Alternative Fees

Episode Credits

Editing and Production: Grant Blackstock

Theme Music: Home Base (Instrumental Version) by TA2MI

This episode is a conversation with Spellbook co-founder Scott Stevenson about intersection of technology and creativity. Spellbook is a AI contract co-pilot for transactional lawyers that plugs into Microsoft Word. Despite founding a legal technology company, Scott is not a lawyer but is computer engineer by training.

As a kid Scott was into video games and in fourth grade he talked his parents into getting him a computer because he wanted to figure out how to create them. By middle school he was building websites and eventually landed an internship at Electronic Arts.

Scott is also interested in electronic music and he launched his first start up, Mune, with a music professor, to create a whole new musical instrument that combined the power of digital music with an acoustic instrument. It was during his time at Mune that Scott started to think about building a legal tech company.

After he got his first legal bill he figured there might be a more efficient and less expensive way to do legal work. So he and lawyer buddy founded Rally, a document automation and templating engine for law firms which later begat Spellbook, but he funny thing about Spellbook, it was originally conceived as a marketing idea to generate leads for Rally.

John Grant talks about how legal teams can adopt Agile and Kanban project management methodologies to optimize workflows, correct bottlenecks and increase client satisfaction. John is a lawyer and the founder of The Agile Attorney consultancy.

As John explains, the traditional project management method is waterfall. A technique often used by technology companies, involving a sequential approach where each stage is dependent on the completion of the previous one.

But John is a proponent of the newer, Agile methodology, which emerged from the software development community. It is a flexible approach where tasks are broken down into small increments with minimal planning, and processes are iterative. Agile is one of John’s favorites because he believes it is well suited for legal work.

John also talks about the value of a Kanban board, a visual tool used to manage work at various stages of a process. It typically includes columns such as “To Do,” “Doing,” and “Done”.

So why is he so into project management methodologies? Because despite coming from a long line of lawyers, before he went to law school, he first worked in tech.

At an early age, Feargus MacDaeid, the founder of legal tech company Definely, was diagnosed with retinitis pigmentosa, which is a rare eye disease that breaks down cells in the retina slowly over time causing vision loss.

Until he got to college to study computer science, Feargus’ vision was decent, but at university, it began to deteriorate and eventually went blind. 

After college he landed a couple of tech jobs but ultimately decided to go to law school. 

After law school, Feargus took jobs at two Magic Circle Firms in London, Allen & Overy and Freshfields where he was working on mergers and acquisitions.  Because of his visual impairment, Feargus had to develop hacks in the software he used, like custom keyboard shortcuts, to get his job done.

He met his Definely co-founder, Nnamdi Emelifeonwu, at Freshfields when the two of them were working on the same deal. As Feargus explains it, his soon to be co-founder was the first colleague that actually took an interest in how Feargus accomplished his work and marveled that he was getting it done. 

The two figured there had to be a better way for Feargus to work on contracts, but the duo figured out pretty quickly there really wasn’t and Definely was born.

Definely is a suite of tools that helps lawyers accomplish the tedious tasks relating to the drafting of contracts. As the company describes it, they create legal tech solutions to free lawyers from frustrating, repetitive tasks, so they can get back to the work that matters.

This episode is a conversation with Katherine Porter about her journey from practicing law to founding her own company, Resourceful Lawyer which is a consultancy helping legal teams implement project management techniques into their legal work.

Katherine discusses her unique approach to problem-solving in the legal field, which involves design thinking and project management principles. Katherine explains the importance of lawyers understanding client needs, the process of workflow mapping, and the challenges of implementing new processes in law firms.

Katherine also emphasizes that empathy and understanding the client journey is a must when designing effective legal services. In the end, she also gives some real world tips about where to begin working in project management principles into legal practice.

As we close out 2023, we are replaying some of our most listened to episodes.

Not surprisingly, AI was the hot topic this year and as its acceptance grows, so to tough questions, like whether AI developers need permission to use copyrighted works and other IP before using it to train artificial intelligence?

In a very popular episode, Professor Mark Lemley of Stanford explained whey he does not think so because he believes that copyrighted works used to train AI fall should under the fair use exception to copyright law.

Professor Lemley is the Director of the Stanford Program in Law, Science and Technology, an author of seven books and more than 130 articles on intellectual property, antitrust and related areas of the law. He is also a co-founder of Lex Machina and most recently of Counsel to Lex Lumina, a boutique IP law firm.

Professor Lemley argues that AI companies should be permitted to use copyrighted works to train AI models without first getting permission from owners because of the benefits AI will yield and the impossibility of tracking down millions of copyright owners to get permission. He also believes that it is a fair use for AI developers to use works protected by intellectual property laws to train artificial intelligence models because such a use is transformative and the more data available to the AI, the more accurate it will be.

In one of 2023's most listened to episodes, Nathan Walter, founder of Briefpoint, joins Technically Legal to explain how his company is using technology and artificial intelligence to automate routine legal drafting tasks. 

A good portion of lawyers’ time and those helping them is copying or re-using prior work. This is especially true in litigation and especially in discovery. 

Thankfully more and more apps have been developed that help automate the creation of legal documents. Historically, these programs have been form based and users populated documents by selecting choices from a menu.

But with advances in generative AI maybe form based software is unneeded. That’s what Briefpoint is banking on.

Briefpoint uses tech to analyze legal documents, like interrogatories and document requests, and then generates preliminary responses to give legal teams a head start on drafting.

As Nathan explains, if more legal processes are automated and augmented with AI, it will bring legal fees down and free up lawyers to focus on the complicated stuff rather than cutting and pasting prior work product.

In the most listened to episode of 2023, Zach Abramowitz makes a repeat appearance on Technically Legal to talk generative AI (like OpenAI) and its impact on legal technology adoption.

Zach is a keen observer of legal tech and its trends.  If you want to keep tabs on up and coming tech geared for legal, Zach is a good person to follow. 

He started is career at a large New York law firm where he worked on mergers and acquisitions. From there he launched his own tech company called Reply All and his latest venture, Killer Whale Strategies, is a consultancy that works with law firms and legal departments to find and utilize technology to disrupt the way traditional legal work is done.

Zach has always been a strong proponent of using artificial intelligence in the legal industry, but after the release of ChatGPT and the growth of other generative AI platforms, he believes it might be the catalyst that finally expedites legal tech adoption.

Zach explains why he thinks generative AI could make legal services cheaper, less profitable for service providers and on a timeline that is faster than most might think.

In this episode, trial attorney, mediator and Web3 believer Mitch Jackson talks about the future of mediation, dispute resolution and the law in a Web3 world.

Mitch is a long time litigator and a name partner at Orange County, California based Jackson and Wilson. He also maintains a busy mediation practice and is passionate about the positive impact new technologies can have on the practice of law.

Mitch talks about how he uses AI to facilitate mediations and his use of virtual reality to engage with clients in the metaverse. He gives a glimpse of what dispute resolution could look like in the future. He thinks cases might converted into digital files that parties interact with on a blockchain and that AI could be consulted about potential resolutions.

Crypto lawyer Nelson Rosario discuses the legal, regulatory and political landscape of blockchain technology and cryptocurrency.

We also get an update from TurnSignl CEO Jazz Hampton about his company’s progress since he was last on the show.

Nelson started out as an intellectual property lawyer but caught the crypto bug in law school. His boutique law firm Rosario Tech Law, focuses on servicing crypto and emerging technology companies that are working to change in the way we all interact with each other and deal with privacy and power.

Although IP is still a significant part of his practice, Nelson’s firm provides those companies with strategic counseling, general outside services and assistance with privacy issues.

Before he went to law school he was an election official in Florida and worked to streamline voter registration rolls and how his county processed absentee ballots.

Nelson discusses the potential impact blockchain technology may or may not have on elections, the political and regulatory ramifications of the recent U.S. sanctions against crypto “mixer” Tornado Cash and how blockchain technology might change certain areas of the law.

This episode is conversation with attorney and legal tech aficionado Stephen Embry. He is also the man behind the TechLaw Crossroads blog which is a great resource for practical and real world insight about legal tech and how technology is impacting the practice of law.

Stephen discusses his journey from practicing law to becoming a technology advisor for legal professionals and firms.

Embry emphasizes that good lawyers will embrace artificial intelligence technology to increase efficiency and serve their clients better, leaving more time for strategic thinking and advisory roles.

But, he also points out that the legal market is highly segmented, with different firms adopting technology at varying paces. While some law firms are proactively embracing AI, he questions whether some of the claims are more hype than reality.

Stephen also discusses the potential of AI handling back-office tasks in law firms, reducing overhead and freeing up time for legal professionals.

He also suggests that a shift from hourly billing to task-based billing could allow law firms to benefit from AI’s efficiency.

However, he noted that the adoption of AI in law firms largely depends on the clients’ demand and the industry’s readiness to depart from traditional billing methods.

Despite the challenges, Embry remains optimistic about the transformative role of AI in the legal field.

If a human uses artificial intelligence to invent something, should the invention be patentable?

If a driverless car injures a pedestrian, should the AI driver be held to a negligence standard as humans would? Or should courts apply the strict liability used for product defects?

What if AI steals money from a bank account? Should it be held to the same standard as a human under criminal law?

All interesting questions and the subject of a book called the Reasonable Robot by this episode’s guest Ryan Abbott. In the book, Abbott argues that laws should be AI neutral and that the acts of artificial intelligence should not be judged differently than humans’. He calls this a “reasonable robot” standard.

The book posits that inventions created by AI should be entitled to protection under intellectual property laws and, if AI causes harm, maybe it too should be judged under the same standard as a human. Abbott argues further that if AI is treated differently under the law, it may hamper innovation.

Ryan is not often idle. He has dual degrees in medicine and law. He has practiced both and also worked in bio-pharmaceuticals. He moved into IP law, and nowadays, even though he still practices, he is a professor. He teaches at the UCLA Medical School. He is also a mediator and arbitrator and Co-Chair of the AI Subcommittee of the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA).

In this episode Nick Rishwain discusses decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs). Nick, a participant in several DAOs including Cougar DAO and TaterDAO, shares insights into the world of DAOs and their unique features.

A DAO is a type of organization that operates on a blockchain, where members own tokens instead of shares and use these tokens to vote on actions the DAO will take. DAOs aim to achieve a common goal without relying on traditional business entity structures.

However, DAOs can be complex and present legal challenges due to their decentralized and distributed nature. Nick explains that while DAOs have gained popularity in the crypto and blockchain space, it’s important to consider the legal implications and potential liabilities associated with participating in a DAO. He emphasizes the need for careful evaluation and choosing the right DAO legal structure, such as forming an LLC, to mitigate risks.

Nick also discusses LexDAO, a legal engineering guild that fosters collaboration between lawyers, engineers, and other professionals interested in improving the legal system through code and software. LexDAO provides resources, community engagement, and advocacy for legal innovation.

The podcast episode concludes with Nick sharing his experience with CougarDAO, formed to acquire real estate–specifically Cougar Island in Idaho. That deal did not come to fruition so the DAO bought property in Colorado, Memphis and most recently in Arizona.

Because DAO legal frameworks are still in their infancy, Cougar Dao operates as a member-managed LLC with a code deference agreement that links the LLC’s activities to a DAO on the Kali platform. Overall, the discussion provides valuable insights into the world of DAOs, their potential benefits, and the legal considerations associated with participating in these decentralized organizations.

Brandon Wiebe, General Counsel and Head of Privacy at Transcend, offers tips about implementing data governance frameworks and how to utilize software in the process. Brandon’s company is a privacy platform that helps legal and compliance teams automate data compliance tasks.

Brandon explains that most data privacy laws, like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU and U.S. state laws like the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), generally require similar things of companies:

• notice at the time of customer data collection
• implementation of data security obligations
• that companies have a lawful basis for collecting information and that use of the information is consistent with the companies stated purpose for collecting it
• individuals have the right to opt out of data sale or sharing.

Despite the many data privacy laws already enacted and new ones on the horizon, Brandon is quick to emphasize that data privacy teams should not let perfect be the enemy of good. They must get started somewhere in their data privacy policy journey.

He says the best place to start is an organizational data map detailing all the places in a company’s tech stack holding data subject to privacy regulations. Once a company has its data mapped, it can more easily comply with customer requests for information as permitted under data privacy laws and can also ensure it is not keeping more data than needed.

Brandon also touches on why AI can complicate data privacy efforts, but also notes that artificial intelligence can also assist with data privacy efforts.

tlpodcast.com/why-the-ftcs-yolo-antitrust-strategy-against-amazon-may-not-actually-be-good-for-competition-adam-kovacevich-ceo-chamber-of-progress/Adam Kovacevich, the founder and CEO of the Chamber of Progress, explains why he thinks the United States Federal Trade Commission’s recent efforts to curb what it believes to be anti-competitive activity by large tech companies may not actually foster competition and could impact innovation.

Most recently the FTC has targeted Amazon to reign in what the FTC perceives to be anti-competitive power over online sales and fulfillment.

The Chamber of Progress describes itself as a new tech industry coalition devoted to a progressive society, economy, workforce, and consumer climate. The organization promotes public policies that “build a fairer, more inclusive country in which all people benefit from technological leaps.” The New York Times describes it as “one of the most powerful tech lobby groups”.

Adam and the Chamber of Progress believe that the FTC’s change in philosophy under its current chairperson, Lina Kahn, could stifle technology innovation and actually harm consumers and sellers on the Amazon Marketplace. Under Chairperson Kahn, the FTC’s focus is less on the impact a company’s market power has on the consumer (i.e. pricing) and more on the structural and market power tech companies have over their respective industries.

Prior to founding the Chamber of Progress, Adam worked at Google for many years as a Senior Director for the company’s US Policy strategy. After Google he took a similar role at Lime-the e-bike and scooter company. Right out of college he was a staffer for his local congressman and ultimhttps://tlpodcast.com/?p=6857ately handed press duties for Senator Joe Lieberman.https://tlpodcast.com/?p=6857

Vivek Rao, talks about his path from workers compensation attorney to co-founder and CEO of Foundation AI, an app that automates the manual process of collecting, categorizing and filing documents and unstructured data.  The software is used by law firms and insurance companies and utilizes a combination of artificial intelligence, optical character recognition (OCR) and computer vision to process incoming documents and email by type, time-sensitivity, and matter or claim.

Vivek, a native of Los Angeles, figured he would get into entertainment law, but ended up as a lawyer working in real estate and finance.

Later on, he started helping a workers compensation firm handle case files. In that role, he saw an opportunity to use AI and natural language processing (NLP) to automate the manual work of processing and filing the thousands of documents his firm received every week.

After the acquisition of a medical AI company he represented as corporate counsel, Vivek started wondering if a similar technology could be employed in the legal and insurance industries and after some ideation, Foundation AI was born.

https://tlpodcast.com/why-effective-legal-operations-management-is-good-for-business-and-frees-up-lawyers-to-practice-law-stephanie-corey-liz-lugones-uplevel-ops/UpLevel Ops Founder Stephanie Corey and COO Liz Lugones visit the podcast to tell us why a good legal operations program is a crucial to managing the business side of law, so lawyers can focus on practicing law.

Stephanie and Liz break down what legal ops is and what it entails. They say it boils down to managing the business aspects of law–from the people and processes to the technology used.

Stephanie and Liz also fill us on why the right people in the right roles improves efficiency and productivity and how well-defined processes can help ensure that everyone knows what they need to do and when.

Liz and Stephanie also emphasize that organizations just can’t just throw tech at a problem to fix it. To make any improvement in legal operations, whether it be adding technology or tweaking a process, the first step is understanding the current state of what is being improved, specific legal department needs and the needs of the clients it serves.

They explain why legal ops is not not a one-size-fits-all approach, and that tailoring solutions is crucial. To figure out what their clients need, UpLevel uses thorough assessments to understand the current environment of a legal department and its goals and current processes.

The episode closes out with a discussion about why legal operations is an ongoing process rather than a one-time project and the importance of being ready to adapt and evolve as needs change.https://tlpodcast.com/legal-operations/

Chad Sakonchick is a serial entrepreneur.

After a stint selling computers for Dell, he launched his first technology company: an early SaaS platform that allowed users to easily create websites.

From there, he launched an app that took online orders for food truck owners and then he launched Spacesift, which he describes as Airbnb for event spaces.

Spacesift did fine, but he didn’t find startup traction until a few years ago when he convinced a lawyer buddy to let him automate the creation of LLC documents.

Using automation apps like Zapier, project management software like Asana and online form apps like Webmerge, Chad built the automation and his friend loved it.

It worked so well, the two decided to launch BetterLegal and while they have graduated to a more sophisticated backend, as we will hear, they are still building the company on a low/no-code philosophy using platforms like Bubble.

After hearing Chad’s backstory, you would think he most certainly would end up pursuing a career in law. While in college at the University of Texas he worked as a paralegal at his dad’s law firm. After that, he landed a job with an early legal tech company that digitized deposition transcripts. But alas, his heart was not in pursuing a career as a lawyer. His passion is entrepreneurship.

Legal technology guru Adriana Linares visits Technically Legal to discuss the the tech and software law firms (and all legal teams really) should be using to run a successful legal practice.

Adriana is a legal tech OG. Fresh out of college in the late 90s, a large Florida law firm hired her to train its lawyers on how to use technology and to help the firm figure out what tech to buy.

Fast forward to the early 2000s, and she started her consultancy LawTech Partners to help legal professionals use technology to maximize their skills, run profitable businesses, and deliver great client service.

At a minimum Adriana advises that lawyers and their teams utilize at least three specific pieces of software: 1) A productivity suite like Microsoft 365; 2) a PDF tool; and 3) case management software.

Adriana explains the differences between case management software, document management platforms, and practice management software. She also touches on the importance of document assembly software and how to maximize the use of data captured during the various stages of a legal matter.

She closes out the discussion explaining why many in legal are missing out when they don’t use CRMs–Client and Customer Relationship Management platforms.

Professor Richard Jolly of Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management and a co-founder of the Stokes Jolly consultancy visits Technically Legal to discuss the importance of motivating legal organizations to change even when they are resistant to do so.

Professor Jolly also shares stories from his experiences as a chef and a psychotherapist and explains how he draws upon them in his organizational and executive consulting practice.

Professor Jolly also discusses the common psychological make-up of lawyers such as high skepticism and frequent reluctance towards change. These traits remind him of an essay by Philosopher Isaiah Berlin called the Hedgehog and the Fox, which is a reference to an idea from the Greek poet Archilochus: “a fox knows many things, but a hedgehog knows one big thing”. 

Applying it to the legal profession, Professor Jolly explains that legal subject matter experts are like hedgehogs with deep expertise in one area, but in a rapidly changing world, the ability to adapt like a fox is increasingly important. Traditional law firms are full of hedgehogs, but organizations such as startups lean more toward foxes because they are better at adapting. The pandemic has accelerated the pace of change, and law firms need to be open to these changes to survive and thrive.

Along those lines, Professor Jolly points out that education and training of young lawyers is more important now because of remote work and the new generation of lawyers want to practice differently than their older colleagues. Specifically, his research has shown that most new lawyers do not plan on spending a whole career at a single law firm.

He also points out that law firms may have to adapt to the new reality that more work may have to be done by partners because associates are increasingly harder to come by.