I don't think they've quite hit their stride yet with the add-on services. I agree with the comments so far: It's not that difficult to organize your trove of legal documents in Google Docs, and I'd rather control my own hiring doc templates with a general-purpose tool like DocuSign than add another tool in the mix.
But the bigger picture here is the fact that they're releasing any such services at all. The chance of a traditional law firm releasing these services is zero, and there are software-based services I really want.
Personally, I'm waiting for the tool where I can declare my company policies around NDAs, and then use Atrium NDA (or whatever) to automatically scan the NDA I received, tell me how it violates my policies, and auto-generates a response to the counterparty.
(The U.S.-centrism in the software industry has always been a pet peeve of mine.)
Indeed, we're currently working on a version 2.0.0. The new release will implement a few small, general improvements, and well as feedback from counsel from a few common-law jurisdictions.
beefhash, if you know lawyers from other jurisdictions, please put them in touch with me at firstname.lastname@example.org. I'd love to provide them the latest working draft of 2.0.0 and read their thoughts.
That being said, I agree the first releases are underwhelming but "If you're not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you've launched too late." 
With recent advances on Neural Network models such as GPT-2, we (engineers, researchers, etc) are closer to be able to analyse any documents written in correct English. It won't be fully autonomous at first, but we can imagine it will help to answer questions such as "given my policies database, do I break the rules defined in that contract?". The tool will give hints, which will be reviewed by an actual lawyer to say the final word.
It is the same idea than https://books.google.com/talktobooks/ , but for legal
The beauty of a tech enabled service company is that you can build it without raising outside funding. You use the earnings from the services to fund product development.
The other great thing is that the market is already proven. You just build a competitive advantage through software that allows you to work more efficiently or provide a better customer experience.
I ended up starting a technology enabled staffing agency for the tech industry.
But once we start adding technology(not necessarily just software), they will become much less fragmented, with a few big winners.
Doesn't that mean venture capital is a necessity ?
Even without the winner take all potential, it still makes for a great $100M business idea that seems much less risky to me. There can be dozens or hundreds of $100M trucking companies. That's a lot of winners. :)
The worst bit is that this will cause a reinforcing loop, of more customers flooding to the market leader, causing the market leader to develop better AI, causing more customers, etc etc.
This enables me to plan the best routes and be the most efficient. My platform will win.
But you imply there are hundreds of niches.
What am I missing ? How do you analyze that market ?
Large, generic haulers just don't offer the same kind of customer service.
> "Atrium LLP is a registered limited liability partnership under the laws of the State of California. Atrium Legal Technology Services, Inc. is a non-law corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware."
Aren't there some legal ethics problems there? Is Atrium the law firm sharing fees with non-lawyers? Is Atrium LTS engaging in the unlicensed practice of law?
I’m sure their lawyers have good arguments that their business is free of conflicts of interest. However, that they appear to intentionally blur the line between the company and the firm is suspicious.
So, maybe I misunderstand this. Are law firms actually selling a percentage of their fee in contingent cases to these companies? Or is it structured as a high-interest loan like the loans to plaintiffs?
I can see this being more useful in a sales situation where you need to make concessions much more regularly and need flexibility in your legal documents. Depending on how hard Atrium is to configure, I suspect it could be a lower cost version of setting up Salesforce CPQ. However, you likely still want this process to be integrated into Salesforce at some point so you’ll have to do that separately still.
Also, the frequency of automating your financing docs is not very compelling. In my experience, your investors provide the term sheets and then you need to redline them back to them. The idea of scanning these types of documents to extract the meaningful data points is very cool (ie. Comparing valuations automatically across spreadsheets) but I would still say a manual review from an attorney is essential due to the risk/reward of missing some small item that isn’t conventional in a term sheet.
I’m curious if anyone here has used Atrium and has see a compelling ROI for your team?
I thought that "conventional" platform tech - basically, document management - wouldn't be compelling enough for venture capital investment.
I guess I was wrong? There's nothing here that looks particularly unique. Not saying there's no demand, but I can't understand where the 1000x returns are going to come from.
There must be more to this than is in the article.
I’m curious how these two platforms compare. The common use cases seem to have a lot of overlap.