Legaltech startup conference: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
Now, sure: not ''all'' of these are ''for-profit'' businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to that idea, ''won’t'') — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t even try. And some are, ''sans doubte'', unique and different. But they are the great minority.
Now, sure: not ''all'' of these are ''for-profit'' businesses (by which I mean ''intending'' to make a profit; a large portion of them, however well disposed to that idea, ''won’t'') — there are some, even at a quick scan, that don’t even try. And some are, ''sans doubte'', unique and different. But they are the great minority.


Now there can be no doubt that the amount the average multinational is prepared to spend in the pursuit, defence and analysis of its legal rights and obligations is, as far as makes any difference to a [[legaltech entrpreneur|legaltechbro]], infinite, but the ''categories of problem'' it encounters when doing that, that [[legaltech]] can profitably solve, are not.  
And there can be no doubt that the amount the average multinational is prepared to spend in the pursuit, defence and analysis of its legal rights and obligations is, as far as makes any difference to a [[legaltech entrpreneur|legaltechbro]], infinite, but the ''categories of problem'' it encounters when doing that, that [[legaltech]] can profitably solve, are not.  


Now 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 very big number. That is the [[legaltech]] promise.
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 very big number. That is the [[legaltech]] promise.


But, and even leaving aside the [[JC]]’s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — the very length of this list ought to prompt some questions. Two hundred and seventy seven startups. There weren’t that many in the dotcom boom.<ref>Hyperbole, I am sure. You needn’t write in.</ref>
But, and even leaving aside the [[JC]]’s usual perorations about scale and [[rent-extraction threshold]]s — plainly these are to be ignored — the very length of this list ought to prompt some questions. Two hundred and seventy seven startups. There weren’t that many in the dotcom boom.<ref>Hyperbole, I am sure. You needn’t write in.</ref>