A Down Economy Could Have an Upside for (Some) Legal Tech Startups
Tech startups could benefit from law firms or legal departments seeking cheaper access to legal services in the face of COVID-19. But they aren't immune to an economic slowdown either.
April 17, 2020 at 08:00 AM
4 minute read
Startups in the legal tech or services market have traditionally had to go up against more robust legacy companies with an established toehold in law firms or legal departments. But the economic disruptions brought about by the spread of COVID-19 may be pushing firms and other consumers of legal services to consider pursuing less established—and in some cases less expensive—alternatives.
To be sure, startups are occupying the same legal tech market as legacy companies, a space that has already seen some collective belt tightening among both businesses and clients alike. Law firms are engaging in salary cuts, layoffs and furloughs, while legal tech providers like e-discovery company DISCO have also trimmed staff to "proactively address and reduce potential risk" in the face of COVID-19.
However, it's possible all of this wallet-watching could reap unintended benefits for legal startups as law firms and legal departments seek out cheaper alternatives to longstanding incumbents, or realign their needs in preparation for the arrival of a post-pandemic world. Legal research provider Fastcase, for example, has received more interest as of late from large-scale upmarket firms looking to make a change.
While CEO Ed Walters stated that the company had been trending up market prior to the outbreak of COVID-19, he also indicated that it can be difficult to tear law firms away from prestige or legacy incumbents in the space, which features heavy-hitters with recognizable names like Thomson Reuters and LexisNexis. "I think when times are good, it's hard for the Am Law 250 firms to buy something like Fastcase… No one ever got fired for buying IBM," Walters said.
But with firms being pushed to make tough decisions with regards to layoffs and salary cuts, name recognition may start to count for less. Per Walters, firms typically keep two legal research services in use so that neither provider can exert too much leverage or power in the relationship. He postulated that firms may be inclined to cut one of those legacy providers in search of lower-cost alternatives, a way of thinking that could remain in place even after the economy recovers. "I think it's a one-way ratchet. That there's no going back," Walters said.
Still, a COVID-19 economy may not offer a path to new business for all legal tech startups. Law firms, legal departments and other businesses operating in the legal sphere may be reluctant to set up new projects while the future remains so uncertain. But Zach Abramowitz, a consultant in the legal technology space, suggested tech companies that have done previous work with a client around solutions like contract extraction tools could find themselves called upon to help navigate pandemic related anxieties related to deal provisions or terms.
"How many companies are taking on new initiatives right now? Probably very few. But if you've already done some work with a technology company and you already have a working relationship there, that's probably an amazing opportunity for the tech company," Abramowitz said.
For instance Evisort, an AI-powered powered contract management platform, has changed its focus in the wake of COVID-19 to concentrate on existing customers. The move was in part a reaction to the obstacles facing new sales. Evisort co-founder and CEO Jerry Ting pointed out that with more offices working from home, it's difficult to reach perspective customers over the phone. The company was also weary of appearing tone-deaf in the midst of a global pandemic.
"It's like, 'Hey, our business is going through a hard time. Do you want to buy some contract management software?' We think that's not tasteful," Ting said.
Instead, the company is taking a more consultative approach to its services, reaching out to existing clients and offering to help them navigate problems related to contract issues like force majeure or locating alternative opportunities for cost cutting. "We're trying to lean into the [COVID-19] situation as much as we can," Ting said.
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
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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