Legaltech startup conference: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|devil|
{{a|devil|
[[File:Kids say the funniest things.png|450px|thumb|center|An occasional column devoted to gems from the IT profession]]
[[File:Kids say the funniest things.png|450px|thumb|center|An occasional column devoted to gems from the IT profession]]
}}We define a [[legaltech start-up conference]] as “opportunities for fantasists to meet the credulous and sell them stuff they don’t need,and a successful one where the credulous side of the room have meaningful budgets and a mandate to modernise and innovate at all costs. This is not nearly as implausible as it sounds, or ought to be.
}}We define a [[legaltech start-up conference]] as “opportunities for [[Reg tech entrepreneur|fantasists]] to meet the [[General counsel|credulous]] to try to sell them [[Legal tech landscape|stuff they don’t need]] with [[When budget allows|budgets they don’t have]]”.  


Here is an interesting list for the [[neural network]] to parse: here are the two hundred and seventy-seven [[Vendor|Vendors]] listed in the Legal Geek “Startup Map”<ref>I am not making this up: https://www.legalgeek.co/startup-map/. There could be more: the utterly bamboozling way it is set out made it hard to be sure I had go them all.</ref> Now I confess, not all of these are necessarily for profit businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to the ''idea'' of making a profit, won’t ''actually'' make one) — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t.  
Here is an interesting list for the [[neural network]] to parse: here are the two hundred and seventy-seven (277) [[Vendor|Vendors]] listed in the Legal Geek “Startup Map”<ref>I am not making this up: https://www.legalgeek.co/startup-map/. There could be more: the utterly bamboozling way it is set out made it hard to be sure I had go them all.</ref> Now I confess, not all of these are necessarily for profit businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to the ''idea'' of making a profit, won’t ''actually'' make one) — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t.  But it is a minority.


But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that most do. Now there can be no doubt that the amounts spent in the pursuit and defence and analysis of one’s legal rights and obligations are, to all intents, infinite, but the categories of problem encountered when doing that, that can profitably be solved by [[legaltech]], are not. ''There are only so many uses you can put technology to''. Do not confuse value of spend and things to spend it on. They are very different.
But let’s just say, for the sake of argument, that the rest do. Now there can be no doubt that the amount a multinational is prepared to spend in the pursuit, defence and analysis of its legal rights and obligations is, as far as makes any difference, infinite, but the ''categories of problem'' it encounters when doing that, that [[legaltech]] can profitably solve, are not.
 
The [[legaltech entrepreneur]]’s assumption is this: even a tiny fraction of an enormous number is still, for a couple of guys in a WeWork office in Shoreditch with laptop, a SquareSpace account and a Bulgarian coder they found on UpWork, a bloody big number.
 
This logic might fly — ''might'' — were there only one'' such “startup” with the bright idea, but, per the above, there are ''at least two hundred and seventy of them''.
 
''There are only so many uses you can put technology to''. Do not confuse quantum of spend and things to spend it on. They are very different.


Even leaving aside the [[JC]]”s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — just the length of this list ought to prompt some questions.  
Even leaving aside the [[JC]]”s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — just the length of this list ought to prompt some questions.