82,964
edits
Legaltech roll of honour: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Now, to be sure: there are some good businesses here. Excellent ones. And there are good businesses ''not'' represented here — perhaps they weren’t prepared to pay legalgeek whatever it asks for publication. We know some of the owners: they are good people. But — well, diamonds in the muck, and all that. | Now, to be sure: there are some good businesses here. Excellent ones. And there are good businesses ''not'' represented here — perhaps they weren’t prepared to pay legalgeek whatever it asks for publication. We know some of the owners: they are good people. But — well, diamonds in the muck, and all that. | ||
As we go we are adding new ventures as we find out about them — admission is free! — though it may | As we go we are adding new ventures as we find out about them — admission is free! — though it may be a club you’d rather not be part of — if you would like yours featured don’t hesitate to drop us a line. | ||
We don’t promise it is accurate, or fair, or up-to-date, or that we have fully understood, or cared less about, the offerings. After 250 or so cappy websites your eyes glaze over. So if you think your business has been unfairly characterised, let us know. | We don’t promise it is accurate, or fair, or up-to-date, or that we have fully understood, or cared less about, the offerings. After 250 or so cappy websites your eyes glaze over. So if you think your business has been unfairly characterised, let us know. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Where we see it, we have also added snarkish, superficial and no doubt thoroughly unjustified shade, in the form of emojis about the products based on their business name, website presentation and proclivity for meaningless buzzwordery. | Where we see it, we have also added snarkish, superficial and no doubt thoroughly unjustified shade, in the form of emojis about the products based on their business name, website presentation and proclivity for meaningless buzzwordery. | ||
Sticking “lex”, “ify” or “ly” in your business name and getting some [[Java coder from Bucharest you found on UpWork]] to | Sticking “lex”, “ify” or “ly” in your business name and getting some [[Java coder from Bucharest you found on UpWork]] to mock up a basic html workflow and claiming you have revolutionised contract management is not, any longer, going to cut it. If you have to be an order of magnitude better than your competition to suceed <ref>© Peter Thiel.</ref>, then the fact that your product does the same thing, and looks exactly the same, as dozens of other offerings on the market ought to tell you something. At least twenty-five firms offer basically the ''same'' contract generation and document management service. ''They will not all survive''. | ||
If you don’t believe me, you are ''welcome'' to click on the now 300 websites we have painstakingly collated. In fact, you ''should''. It is a sobering realisation of how homogenous, quotidian, and basically ''dreary'' this sector is. There are a few outliers, but broadly the applications all do more or less the same things, with few variations. | If you don’t believe me, you are ''welcome'' to click on the now 300 websites we have painstakingly collated. In fact, you ''should''. It is a sobering realisation of how homogenous, quotidian, and basically ''dreary'' this sector is. There are a few outliers, but broadly the applications all do more or less the same things, with few variations. | ||