Great piece
She writes
That’s Harvey’s (www.harvey.ai) business model.
Despite multiple inquiries, I can’t even get a response to my request to demo the product. Same is true for several of my solo and small firm colleagues.
This is a problem.
It’s one thing for a law firm to develop its own proprietary AI. I have no right to a firm’s business tools.
But it’s a different mattter when a company that operates in legal and serves the AmLaw 100 firms that many small firms and I litigate against prevents us from using those tools. That puts us at a competitive disadvantage and impedes access to justice.
I know that there are a myriad of AI tools available to solos and smalls. And it may be that Harvey’s price point doesn’t make sense financially. Trouble is, I can’t even make those determinations when I can’t access the product for a test drive.
Developing AI tools that are accessible to only a small segment of the legal profession is a dangerous and troubling precedent with consequences for access to justice. As AI takes hold, we need to be vigilant in ensuring that the vendors introducing these tools don’t put any sector if the legal profession — particularly solos and smalls — at a competitive disadvantage.
