Contract Approval Via Instant Message: PactSafe Looks to Slack, Intercom for Agreements
Looking to leverage the corporate world's growing use of instant message programs like Slack and Intercom, PactSafe moves to integrate contract processes into chat platforms.
September 24, 2018 at 10:00 AM
3 minute read
|
In the digital age, contracts are hosted on websites and apps, and signed by a click of a button. For some, however, this just isn't seamless enough.
Contract drafting software provider PactSafe has announced the launch of “Chat-to-Sign,” a new tool it says will bring contract approvals to a new frontier: chat messaging services. Legaltech News caught up with PactSafe to discuss how contracts via instant message works and why it is needed.
What it is: Chat-to-Sign is an application that allows users to extract data from conversations in messaging platforms Slack and Intercom and transfer that information into contract templates hosted on PactSafe's contract drafting tool. Once new contracts are created using the information, Chat-to-Sign can send the agreements to recipients via Slack or Intercom, and have them “sign” the contract through the messaging apps as well.
How such signing works is “akin to the same type of experience one has accepting terms of service” for online or mobile app services, i.e. pressing a button or checking a box, said Eric Prugh, co-founder and chief product officer at PactSafe.
Why is it needed? PactSafe believes that the ability to create and execute contracts via instant messages can allow different corporate teams to send out and manage contracts in a faster, more seamless fashion.
Since Slack is increasingly used as an internal communication channel between employees in a company, Prugh said Chat-to-Sign could be leveraged by the HR department to push out initial onboarding agreements, or by legal departments to send out NDAs to specific employees.
On the other hand, since Intercom is a chat messaging platform used by companies and their customers, Prugh added that Chat-to-Sign can also be leveraged to create and send out simple sales contracts. In fact, he noted that PactSafe uses its newly launched application for just that purpose.
To be sure, the types of contracts that Chat-to-Sign is meant to handle are fairly simple, straightforward agreements. “Generally, these are what we call high-velocity contracts,” Prugh said. “It's not going to be an agreement that is overly complex.”
How it works: While PactSafe automates much of the contract drafting process, exacting data from conversations in Slack and Intercom is a somewhat manual process. Using Chat-to-Sign, a person engaged in a conversation on one of the messaging platforms must highlight the messages they want extracted. From there, they upload the information to PactSafe's contract drafting tool, and use it to draft a personalized contract that is sent back into the original chat conversation. After a recipient signs the contract, it is recorded on PactSafe's consent management tool.
Competition: To date, there is no direct competition to PactSafe's Chat-to-Sign application. But there are many other legal tech companies in the market who offer similar contract drafting solutions. Thomson Reuters' Contract Express and AbacusNext, which acquired document automation company HotDocs in late 2017, for example, are well known in the contract drafting space.
Others also offer similar solutions for different types of legal users. On-demand legal service providers Rocket Lawyer and LegalZoom have automated contracting tools for legal consumers, for instance, while Litera Microsystems launched a contract drafting tool for legal departments and law firms in early 2018.
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
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
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