Fastcase Looks to Expand Access to Analytics with AI Sandbox Platform
The platform will act as a one-stop-shop for law firms who want to test out AI analytics tools on their own data.
May 04, 2018 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
Over the years, law firms have deployed big data analytics in novel ways, from measuring how to best retain clients to predicting outside counsel spend. Many of these analytics platforms, whether built internally or by a legal technology provider, have leveraged artificial intelligence (AI) technology to elicit insights from unstructured or unorganized data. But not all law firms and legal professionals have taken advantage of these advances in analytics.
Legal research provider Fastcase, however, is hoping to change that. Its “AI Sandbox” platform seeks to democratize access to AI analytics tools by offering a variety of applications in a centralized platform alongside Fastcase's proprietary legal research data.
What it is: AI Sandbox is a platform through which law firms can upload their data to secure private virtual servers and take advantage of a multitude of cloud-based AI analytics tools—such as those from IBM Watson, Neota Logic, Contraxsuite and LexPredict—for a fee.
Law firms can use the tools to elicit insights from their data, as well as data pulled from Fastcase's legal research platform and their partners, including PACER, Docket Alarm and Courtroom Insight. Using the platform's tools, for instance, a law firm can determine the percent of intellectual property (IP) cases its attorneys won in a certain jurisdiction, compared to how all IP cases were decided in that same jurisdiction.
Security, of course, is a big part of AI sandbox. Ed Walters, CEO of Fastcase and adjunct professor of Law at Georgetown University Law Center, noted that to protect the data law firms upload to the platform's private serves, AI Sandbox uses “the same military-grade security that we use to protect the Fastcase databases.”
Law Firm Clients: AI Sandbox is only offered through Fastcase's “developer program,” which is currently only available to law firms. Though the platform and developer program launched in June 2017, it was only recently that Fastcase brought on most of its current ten law firm customers in the program.
“Most of them signed up around the turn of the year,” Walters said, adding that Fastcase also launched a bimonthly “educational webinar series” in March 2018 to help law firms learn how to use the AI tools hosted on AI Sandbox.
Law firms using AI sandbox include Am Law 100 firms like BakerHostetler, DLA Piper, and Baker Donelson. Katherine Lowry, director of practice services at BakerHostetler, noted AI Sandbox's tools can also be useful beyond just analytics.
For instance, one tool in Sandbox, IBM Conversational Service, “is very interesting to us because we have already created two chatbot prototypes internally, one using Amazon Alexa and the other using the Microsoft Bot framework. So what I would like to do is look at IBM's Conversational Service” as a basis for a chatbot as well.
Though the platform is only currently offered to law firms, Fastcase is aiming to expand its user base to include law schools in the near future.
An AI Cocktail Party: When asked why law firms use AI Sandbox instead of just going to AI analytics tool providers themselves, Lowry noted that the platform is a more efficient way to access and test tools before fully committing. “In order to try products in ordinary terms, we would have to license or subscribe to them and carry on a long-term relationship with [the provider].”
Walters added that AI Sandbox was intended to be a place where law firms and eventually law schools could connect with AI professionals and platforms to discuss different data analytics projects.
“I think of it like a cocktail party of all of the most interesting data scientists and tool providers in the world,” he said. “If you get them all in one room and facilitate a conversation between them and people in law firms and law schools who are trying to create interesting new things, that's what the AI Sandbox would be: The world's geekiest and most powerful cocktail party.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
- 2Dallas Jury Awards $98.65M in Botham Jean Killing by Dallas Officer
- 3In Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
- 4Pharmaceutical Patents: Benefits and Challenges
- 5Where Do Web-Tracking Class Actions Belong? 8th Circuit Weighs the Issue
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250