5 ms·

Headline is a little misleading. We started LTS, our legal tech company, with the goal of helping lawyers provide legal services to startups in a more speedy, t

by justin 9y ago

Headline is a little misleading. We started LTS, our legal tech company, with the goal of helping lawyers provide legal services to startups in a more speedy, transparent and price predicable way. To us, that means building tools that lawyers use, and not creating the Uber of lawyers or a master AI that replaces lawyers (I don't think the latter is possible right now). Atrium, the law firm founded by two of my LTS cofounders, is putting that software to use to help startups now. We are hiring engineers (http://atriumlts.com http://atriumlts.com). Some reasons to join: learn from experienced founders who have done it before, and you can build on short iterations for a customer that's very thankful and you can just walk over and talk to.

aswanson 9y ago
Headlines are almost guaranteed to be misleading. That's why I click on the comments before the article. Sensationalism should not be rewarded.
- ChrisSD 9y ago
  I've complained about some BBC headlines before. I was essentially told that there's a kind of headline exemption. So long as the article at some point contradicts the headline then it doesn't matter, apparently.
- QAPereo 9y ago
  I'm finding that the top few comments here are often more informative and better supported than at least half of the actual posted articles. To be clear, I see that as an endorsement of HN more than anything else.
pavel_lishin 9y ago
> Headline is a little misleading I guess you can't say "Your article hits a factual error before it even begins" to the Washington Post, huh.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- 0xbear 9y ago
  I don't see why you can't. Most of their articles do that. Truth is often mundane, people wouldn't click through.
  - pavel_lishin 9y ago
    Sure, but my point was that justin probably doesn't want to antagonize a news outlet that's giving his project effectively free publicity.
goeric 9y ago
If you're ever looking for PM's this is right up my ally. I was the co-founder and head of product at Naritiv (Techstars/Disney Accel S14, acquired by Hootsuite). I also ran ops as well and dealt with our law firms (corp and entertainment) every week. Would love to talk! Email in profile.
bmh_ca 9y ago
Justin – I reached out a couple times but had not heard back. I'm an international lawyer and savvy developer (currently maintaining knockout.js) and have had a lean/quiet startup for several years now in the legal-augmentation tech space. We're in the process of partnering with the world's largest law firms. Feel free to drop me a line - brianmhunt at gmail.com
paulddraper 9y ago
EDIT: HN title has been corrected. So this needs a change from "Startup wants to replace lawyers with robots" to "Startup wants to augment lawyers with automation" ?
pc86 9y ago
Both job links 404.
dang 9y ago
Ok, we reworded the title above using language from your comment.
kevmo 9y ago
I just had an incredibly similar thing happen with a slightly misleading headline. My legal tech company[1] was in the WSJ[2] on Monday, and the byline was "A nonprofit has developed an online program designed to help people prepare a chapter 7 filing without a lawyer"... which isn't quite what we are doing. We are actually licensing a product to legal aid clinics that do bankruptcy. The process is actually: legal aid clinic directs people to our software, we guide them through an interview, then we populate a PDF bankruptcy petition that we send directly to the clinic for a final review. So, while we have largely removed lawyer time from the process, we deemed that final review essential. The article did explain this by the end, but the headline got some communities pretty alarmed. [1] https://upsolve.org https://upsolve.org [2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-struggling-consumers-a-cheaper-way-to-file-for-bankruptcy-1505096071 https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-struggling-consumers-a-chea...
will_brown 9y ago
I don't mean to pile on but I'd be interested as a lawyer dabbling in tech. In the last two years I co-founded startup with a patent pending legal pricing software called Statutory Litigation Automated Pricing, S.L.A.P. (acquired) and this past year I built a prototype "self-serve legal kiosk" and kiosk software Demoed at Walmart HQ for use in their stores with The Law Store (thelawstore.com) I don't think that makes me an engineer but I am handy at applying existing technologies to the legal field to improve efficency.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- spencer_54 9y ago
  Hi Will, I work at Atrium LTS. Please check out our careers page and let us know if there's something that might be a match! https://www.atrium.co/careers/ https://www.atrium.co/careers/
zjaffee 9y ago
How do you tend to compete with the likes of established players such as westlaw that have been around for so long? I can possibly imagine a startup which helps big company lawyers, as they tend to be more bullish on new tech, but when it comes to the legal industry I don't know. It's not that I don't believe you guys have a fighting chance at having an impact in the legal technology space, the problem is that the legal industries is one of the slowest moving around, and silicon valley funding culture requires fast results.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
tensor 9y ago
Are you planning on building in house AI/ML or do you plan on licensing from existing players in the space?
busterarm 9y ago
I'm a software developer (mostly focused on operations and marketing) on a small, two-person team at a large, national plaintiff's firm. Thanks for clarifying -- the headline was very clickbait and disingenuous -- so much so that I had a strong reaction to it. I think your plan is a good one because you have a small group of clients with similar needs to focus on and they have certain expectations about the tech they interact with. Good luck!
seanmcdirmid 9y ago
Uber for lawyers reminds me of the street walking lawyer skit on Seattle's old Almost Live TV show (with a pre-famous Bill Nye not being a science guy): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7QtRCGQmrc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7QtRCGQmrc .
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
mrits 9y ago
There is a startup here in Austin that does seem to want to be the Uber of lawyers : csdisco
6stringmerc 9y ago
It'd probably be worthwhile to mention what your Errors & Omissions coverage limits are / will be / can be / etc to the buying public. It'd probably be worthwhile to ask what your D&O coverage might be by comparison. I mean, just apples to different colored apples being offered for sale.
jaypaulynice 9y ago
>a master AI that replaces lawyers (I don't think the latter is possible right now) We did this at Recommind (https://www.recommind.com/axcelerate-ediscovery-product-page/ https://www.recommind.com/axcelerate-ediscovery-product-page...), but replacing low level lawyers for case management. A senior lawyer/case manager usually trained the system to identify relevant documents based on a few...
londontechnerd 9y ago
Definitely check out SeedLegals (https://seedlegals.com/ https://seedlegals.com/) - it does exactly that! It launched this year in the UK and is now used to automate the legal process for 2 funding rounds every day

by justin 9y ago

aswanson 9y ago

Headlines are almost guaranteed to be misleading. That's why I click on the comments before the article. Sensationalism should not be rewarded.

ChrisSD 9y ago
I've complained about some BBC headlines before. I was essentially told that there's a kind of headline exemption. So long as the article at some point contradicts the headline then it doesn't matter, apparently.
QAPereo 9y ago
I'm finding that the top few comments here are often more informative and better supported than at least half of the actual posted articles. To be clear, I see that as an endorsement of HN more than anything else.

pavel_lishin 9y ago

> Headline is a little misleading I guess you can't say "Your article hits a factual error before it even begins" to the Washington Post, huh.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
0xbear 9y ago
I don't see why you can't. Most of their articles do that. Truth is often mundane, people wouldn't click through.
- pavel_lishin 9y ago
  Sure, but my point was that justin probably doesn't want to antagonize a news outlet that's giving his project effectively free publicity.

goeric 9y ago

If you're ever looking for PM's this is right up my ally. I was the co-founder and head of product at Naritiv (Techstars/Disney Accel S14, acquired by Hootsuite). I also ran ops as well and dealt with our law firms (corp and entertainment) every week. Would love to talk! Email in profile.

bmh_ca 9y ago

Justin – I reached out a couple times but had not heard back. I'm an international lawyer and savvy developer (currently maintaining knockout.js) and have had a lean/quiet startup for several years now in the legal-augmentation tech space. We're in the process of partnering with the world's largest law firms. Feel free to drop me a line - brianmhunt at gmail.com

paulddraper 9y ago

EDIT: HN title has been corrected. So this needs a change from "Startup wants to replace lawyers with robots" to "Startup wants to augment lawyers with automation" ?

pc86 9y ago

Both job links 404.

dang 9y ago

Ok, we reworded the title above using language from your comment.

kevmo 9y ago

I just had an incredibly similar thing happen with a slightly misleading headline. My legal tech company[1] was in the WSJ[2] on Monday, and the byline was "A nonprofit has developed an online program designed to help people prepare a chapter 7 filing without a lawyer"... which isn't quite what we are doing. We are actually licensing a product to legal aid clinics that do bankruptcy. The process is actually: legal aid clinic directs people to our software, we guide them through an interview, then we populate a PDF bankruptcy petition that we send directly to the clinic for a final review. So, while we have largely removed lawyer time from the process, we deemed that final review essential. The article did explain this by the end, but the headline got some communities pretty alarmed. [1] https://upsolve.org https://upsolve.org [2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-struggling-consumers-a-cheaper-way-to-file-for-bankruptcy-1505096071 https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-struggling-consumers-a-chea...

will_brown 9y ago

I don't mean to pile on but I'd be interested as a lawyer dabbling in tech. In the last two years I co-founded startup with a patent pending legal pricing software called Statutory Litigation Automated Pricing, S.L.A.P. (acquired) and this past year I built a prototype "self-serve legal kiosk" and kiosk software Demoed at Walmart HQ for use in their stores with The Law Store (thelawstore.com) I don't think that makes me an engineer but I am handy at applying existing technologies to the legal field to improve efficency.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
spencer_54 9y ago
Hi Will, I work at Atrium LTS. Please check out our careers page and let us know if there's something that might be a match! https://www.atrium.co/careers/ https://www.atrium.co/careers/

zjaffee 9y ago

How do you tend to compete with the likes of established players such as westlaw that have been around for so long? I can possibly imagine a startup which helps big company lawyers, as they tend to be more bullish on new tech, but when it comes to the legal industry I don't know. It's not that I don't believe you guys have a fighting chance at having an impact in the legal technology space, the problem is that the legal industries is one of the slowest moving around, and silicon valley funding culture requires fast results.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

tensor 9y ago

Are you planning on building in house AI/ML or do you plan on licensing from existing players in the space?

busterarm 9y ago

I'm a software developer (mostly focused on operations and marketing) on a small, two-person team at a large, national plaintiff's firm. Thanks for clarifying -- the headline was very clickbait and disingenuous -- so much so that I had a strong reaction to it. I think your plan is a good one because you have a small group of clients with similar needs to focus on and they have certain expectations about the tech they interact with. Good luck!

seanmcdirmid 9y ago

Uber for lawyers reminds me of the street walking lawyer skit on Seattle's old Almost Live TV show (with a pre-famous Bill Nye not being a science guy): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7QtRCGQmrc https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B7QtRCGQmrc .

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

mrits 9y ago

There is a startup here in Austin that does seem to want to be the Uber of lawyers : csdisco

6stringmerc 9y ago

It'd probably be worthwhile to mention what your Errors & Omissions coverage limits are / will be / can be / etc to the buying public. It'd probably be worthwhile to ask what your D&O coverage might be by comparison. I mean, just apples to different colored apples being offered for sale.

jaypaulynice 9y ago

>a master AI that replaces lawyers (I don't think the latter is possible right now) We did this at Recommind (https://www.recommind.com/axcelerate-ediscovery-product-page/ https://www.recommind.com/axcelerate-ediscovery-product-page...), but replacing low level lawyers for case management. A senior lawyer/case manager usually trained the system to identify relevant documents based on a few...

londontechnerd 9y ago

Definitely check out SeedLegals (https://seedlegals.com/ https://seedlegals.com/) - it does exactly that! It launched this year in the UK and is now used to automate the legal process for 2 funding rounds every day