Legaltech: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
1. (''Vogue usage'') [[Information technology]] that assists in the provision of or, more likely, ''[[Legal services delivery|delivery]]'' of, legal services. In these pages used interchangeably with “[[reg tech]]”. Both quite disappointing.
1. (''Vogue usage'') [[Information technology]] that assists in the provision of or, more likely, ''[[Legal services delivery|delivery]]'' of, legal services. In these pages used interchangeably with “[[reg tech]]”. Both quite disappointing.


2. (''Contrarian usage'') ''Not'' [[chat-bot]]s, {{t|AI}}, [[metadata extraction]], fuzzy logic or [[semantic syntactical parsing|reg tech]]. That’s easy: the answer is [[blockchain]].<ref>Yes, I am trying to be funny.</ref> [[Legal technology]] is the real-life [[Code: Version 2.0|code]] that lawyers generate every day: '''[[words]]'''.
2. (''Contrarian usage'') ''Not'' [[chat-bot]]s, {{t|AI}}, [[metadata extraction]], fuzzy logic or [[semantic syntactical parsing|reg tech]] or [[blockchain]]. Instead, the [[Code: Version 2.0|code]] that lawyers are trained in how to programme from their first day at law school: '''[[words]]'''.


===Addressing the [[barnacle]] risk===
'''[[Strategic over tactical]]''': When drafting and updating templates *always* prioritise [[strategic over tactical]]. Say a new regulation has been introduced (I mean, just imagine!) which poses the question whether an existing form should be updated:
*really, does it? Challenge whether any change is necessary
**on economic grounds (could we lose money? How much? Realistically, how likely?)
**on regulatory grounds (could we be in breach of the law? What are the consequences?)
**on reputational grounds (could this affect the firm's franchise? How?)
*If the issue is important look to do so in a way that shortens and simplifies:
**take out specifics and render them as general statements
**remove optionality and complexity – this is a tech and management imperative.
{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*{{aiprov|A faster horse}}
*[[A faster horse]]
*{{br|Code: Version 2.0}}
*{{br|Code: Version 2.0}}
*[[Plain English]]
*[[Plain English]]
*[[Why is reg tech so disappointing?]]
*[[Why is reg tech so disappointing?]]
*[[Software as a service]]
*[[Software as a service]]

Revision as of 17:17, 7 February 2021

The JC pontificates about technology
An occasional series.
I have never been able to find out for sure whether Smalt was a wind up. But it must have been.


Index: Click ᐅ to expand:
Technology
Design

Comments? Questions? Suggestions? Requests? Insults? We’d love to 📧 hear from you.
Sign up for our newsletter.

Legal tech
/ˈliːgəl//tɛk/ (n.)

1. (Vogue usage) Information technology that assists in the provision of or, more likely, delivery of, legal services. In these pages used interchangeably with “reg tech”. Both quite disappointing.

2. (Contrarian usage) Not chat-bots, AI, metadata extraction, fuzzy logic or reg tech or blockchain. Instead, the code that lawyers are trained in how to programme from their first day at law school: words.

See also

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Legaltech&oldid=53790"