God
forbid
a
disaster
had
befallen
Austin,
Texas,
last
week,
because
it
could
have
set
back
the
evolution
of
legal
tech
by
at
least
a
decade.
Assembled
there
were
many
of
the
best
and
the
brightest
of
the
legal
tech
world,
who
had
all
come
together
for
the
fourth
edition
of
what
has
become
the
must-attend
event
for
legal
tech
innovators,
entrepreneurs
and
investors
–
the
TLTF
Summit.
Produced
by
The
Legaltech
Fund,
the
first
venture
capital
firm
devoted
exclusively
to
legal
tech,
it
is
a
conference
I
previously
dubbed the
Davos
of
legal
tech
for
the
fact
that
it
brings
together
leaders
from
across
disciplines
to
engage
in
open
and
unfettered
dialogue
about
the
state
and
future
of
legal
innovation.
As
someone
who
has
attended
all
four
summits,
I’ve
had
a
front-row
seat
to
its
evolution.
Unique
to
this
conference
is
its
mix
of
people.
It
is
invitation
only,
and
TLTF
staff
literally
call
and
interview
everyone
who
applies
to
ensure
the
right
fit.
It
is
also
sales
free
–
no
exhibitors
or
salespeople.
To
encourage
open
dialogue,
the
summit
operates
under
the
Chatham
House
Rule,
by
which
participants
are
free
to
use
the
information
they
receive,
but
not
to
reveal
the
identify
or
affiliation
of
any
speaker
or
participant.
Kristen
Sonday,
founder
and
CEO
of
Paladin,
and
Ryan
Alshak,
founder
and
CEO
of
Laurel,
enjoy
some
Texas
barbecue
during
an
after-hours
party.
This
formula
adds
up
to
a
conference
attended
by
a
who’s
who
of
legal
tech:
investors
from
venture
capital
and
private
equity
firms,
CEOs
and
top
executives
from
legal
tech
companies,
managing
partners
and
innovation
leaders
from
some
of
the
largest
–
and
some
of
the
most
innovative
–
law
firms
in
the
world,
founders
of
companies
ranging
from
early-stage
startups
to
established
leaders,
and
lawyers
and
legal
professionals
who
are
at
the
leading
edge
innovation.
In
his
keynote
to
open
this
year’s
summit,
organizer Zach
Posner,
cofounder
and
managing
director
of
The
LegalTech
Fund,
did
as
he
had
done
in
past
years,
inviting
attendees
to
skip
the
sessions
in
favor
of
spending
time
and
taking
walks
with
acquaintances
new
and
old.
Again
this
year,
as
he
had
before,
he
encouraged
attendees
to
make
“who
luck”
happen,
conjuring
a
concept conceived
by
business
author
Jim
Collins.
As
I
walked
the
hallways
and
grounds
of
the
Omni
Barton
Creek
Resort
and
asked
attendees
their
impression
of
the
summit,
superlatives
abounded.
The
best
conference
in
legal
tech.
No
other
conference
creates
such
a
sense
of
community.
I
feel
safe
here,
knowing
I
won’t
be
accosted
by
sales
pitches.
An
unparalleled
mix
of
attendees.
The
best
swag.
The
best
food.
Fantastic
location.
These
were
all
paraphrases
of
comments
I
heard
repeatedly.
And
remember,
these
are
people,
for
the
most
part,
who
attend
more
than
their
fair
share
of
conferences.
So
they
know
of
what
they
speak.
But
as
the
summit
has
quadrupled
in
size
over
its
four
years,
I
also
heard
many
return
attendees
express
concern
that
some
of
that
“who
luck”
was
getting
lost
to
the
question
of
“Who’s
here?”,
exacerbated
by
name
badges
with
tiny
type
and
the
lack
of
an
attendee
roster.
More
on
that
later.
A
Focus
On
AI
If
superlatives
characterized
the
conference,
AI
characterized
its
theme.
In
an
ironic
twist
of
fate,
the
first
TLTF
Summit,
held
in
Miami
Dec.
7-9,
2022,
convened
just
days
after
the
Nov.
30,
2022,
launch
of
ChatGPT.
Now,
four
years
later,
this
gathering
in
the
Austin
hill
country
seemed
to
confirm
how
far
we
have
come.
Legal
tech,
it
seemed
last
week,
is
no
longer
feeling
its
way
toward
an
AI-driven
future
–
it
has
arrived
at
one.
As
I
mingling
with
founders,
law
firm
leaders,
corporate
counsel,
investors
and
others,
the
mood
felt
strikingly
unified.
Everyone,
from
the
earliest-stage
startups
to
the
industry’s
largest
players,
seemed
to
be
working
on
some
version
of
the
same
mandate,
that
of
how
to
operationalize
AI
in
legal
work,
not
as
a
novelty,
but
as
infrastructure.
Not
to
mention
how
to
do
it
responsibly,
at
scale,
and
with
the
end
user
squarely
in
focus.
This
was
reflected
in
the
summit’s
eight
programming
tracks,
15
panels,
15
roundtables,
seven
education
sessions,
and
hundreds
of
companies
represented.
The
managing
partners
of
Morgan
Lewis
(left)
and
Seyfarth
(right)
and
the
former
managing
partner
of
Skadden
(center)
offered
a
rare
candid
look
at
how
BigLaw’s
leaders
are
navigating
AI
adoption.
For
example,
the
panel
“Leadership
&
Technology
in
Law,”
featuring
the
managing
partners
of
Morgan
Lewis
and
Seyfarth
and
the
former
managing
partner
of
Skadden,
offered
a
rare
candid
look
at
how
BigLaw’s
leaders
are
navigating
AI
adoption,
pricing
transformations
and
clients’
demands
for
greater
value.
Another
panel,
the
“AI
Effect
on
Law
Firm
Economics,”
considered
the
economic
case,
that
AI
is
simultaneously
undermining
and
reinventing
the
billable
hour,
enabling
fixed-fee
and
subscription
models,
and
offering
firms
the
data
visibility
they’ve
always
lacked.
“AI
Is
My
Co-Counsel”
brought
together
Microsoft,
Google,
Warburg
Pincus,
Streamline
AI
and
Clearbrief
to
dissect
what
is
working
in
corporate
legal
departments
–
and
where
hallucinations,
data
protection,
and
explainability
still
pose
real
barriers.
Natalie
Knowlton,
associate
director
of
legal
innovation
at
Stanford
University
(in
white
coat
against
wall),
moderated
a
roundtable
on
the
future
of
nonlawyer
ownership.
Meanwhile,
in
“Unlocking
Collaboration:
Interoperability
in
Legal
AI,”
speakers
from
Meta,
Cityblock
Health,
HSF
Kramer,
Harbor,
and
Legaltech
Hub
made
the
case
for
interoperability,
arguing
that
the
next
leap
in
AI
won’t
come
from
smarter
models,
but
from
better
systems
that
talk
to
each
other.
One
of
the
most
talked-about
panels,
“Who
Controls
the
Future
of
Legal
Services?”,
captured
the
tension
and
opportunity
in
the
shifting
ownership
of
the
“legal
services
stack,”
as
ABS
models,
MSOs,
and
AI-driven
platforms
challenge
traditional
firm
structures.
The
Next
Wave
of
Legal
AI
A
signature
feature
of
the
summit
is
its
Startup
Showcase,
which
this
year
introduced
17
early-stage
companies
spanning
such
areas
as
AI-native
litigation
platforms
(TrialKit),
contract
intelligence
(Syntracts),
structured
data
extraction
(LexSelect),
patent
automation
(Paximal,
Patlytics),
in-house
copilots
(Ruli),
compliance
infrastructure
(SurePath
AI),
and
conversational
AI
(Querious).
Cumulatively,
their
presentations
reflected
several
of
the
key
themes
currently
dominating
the
legal
tech
landscape:
-
Agentic
AI:
Not
just
answering
questions,
but
performing
tasks
(Paximal,
Newcode.ai,
Lead
Autopilot). -
Data
structuring:
Turning
messy
PDFs
into
usable
data,
enabling
AI
accuracy
at
scale
(LexSelect,
Syntracts). -
Vertical
AI
platforms:
Built
specifically
for
injury
claims,
immigration,
private
markets
or
patents
(Predict.law,
CaseBlink,
Covenant,
Patlytics). -
AI-first
infrastructure:
Governing
AI
usage,
mitigating
risk,
and
automating
compliance
(SurePath
AI,
Warrant).
In
addition
to
startups,
the
summit
also
highlighted
scale-stage
and
growth-track
companies.
The
15
scale
stage
presenters,
described
as
companies
“that
are
scaling
rapidly
and
redefining
the
legaltech
landscape,
included:
DraftWise,
FirmPilot,
Flo
Recruit,
Foundation
AI,
HelloPrenup,
Hona,
Jigsaw,
Jusfy,
Lawline,
New
Era
ADR,
Orbital,
SimpleClosure,
SimplyAgree,
StructureFlow
and
Vertican.
Meanwhile,
the
growth
track
featured
nine
companies
that
have
achieved
substantial
growth
“and
long
surpassed
product-market
fit:
BlackCloak,
Bridge
Legal,
Centerbase,
Harvey,
LegalOn,
Scalar,
Smokeball,
Steno,
and
Trust
&
Will.
Lowering
the
‘Who
Luck’
Odds
But
even
for
all
of
its
substance,
much
of
the
TLTF
Summit’s
value
still
comes
from
its
format
–
from
the
serendipity
of
its
“who
luck.”
Yet
among
those
who
had
attended
this
conference
before,
I
heard
grumbling
over
its
growth.
The
first
year
was
capped
at
a
relatively
intimate
250
registrants
(and
Posner
said
in
his
keynote
that
the
actual
attendance
had
been
around
150).
Last
year
was
supposed
to
have
been
capped
at
500
but
actually
reached
around
650.
This
year,
total
registrants
reached
876.
By
the
standards
of
large
legal
tech
conferences
such
as
Legalweek
and
ILTACON,
the
TLTF
Summit
is
still
small.
But
by
the
standard
of
making
“who
luck”
happen,
this
year’s
larger
attendance
meant
a
lowering
of
the
odds.
In
my
review
of
last
year’s
summit,
I
wrote,
“Without
question,
the
defining
trait
of
this
summit
is
its
atmosphere
of
engagement,
discovery
and
serendipity.”
That
is
still
a
true
statement.
But,
somehow,
it
felt
less
true
this
year.
There
was
less
of
that
serendipity
and
spontaneity.
This
is
not
just
me
talking.
I
heard
it
over
and
over
again
from
others
who
had
attended
in
prior
years.
Through
sheer
coincidence,
at
one
of
the
standing-room-only
programs,
my
Legaltech
Week
co-panelist
Stephanie
Wilkins,
director
of
content
at
Legaltech
Hub,
and
I
found
ourselves
sitting
on
the
floor
directly
across
from
each
other.
When
Stephanie
sent
me
the
photo
on
the
right,
I
responded
with
one
of
her.
One
seemingly
preventable
side
effect
of
this
year’s
larger
attendance
was
that
seminar
rooms
were
consistently
standing-room
only.
At
virtually
every
program
I
attended,
many
audience
members
were
forced
to
stand
crowded
along
the
walls
or
to
plop
down
cross-legged
on
the
floor.
Not
only
was
this
uncomfortable
for
the
audience,
but
I
heard
from
speakers
that
it
was
distracting
for
them,
particularly
as
late
arrivers
jockeyed
for
a
space.
I
get
it:
Success
brings
growth
and
growth
brings
growing
pains.
I’ve
been
on
the
conference
circuit
long
enough
to
see
several
conferences
that
started
small
and
grew
exponentially
and
remained
successful
–
or
became
even
more
successful
–
through
it
all.
But
there
comes
a
point
where
the
who-luck
runs
low,
and
the
very
thing
that
characterized
the
conference
in
its
early
days
morphs
into
something
much
different.
‘Still
the
Best’
Thankfully,
that
has
not
happened
yet,
and
my
complaints
about
the
numbers
are
nothing
more
than
picking
nits
off
an
otherwise
fantastic
conference.
In
fact,
in
the
case
of
virtually
every
repeat
attendee
who
grumbled
to
me
about
its
growth,
they
would
always
quickly
temper
that
comment
with
the
postscript:
But
it
is
still
the
best
conference
in
legal
tech.
One
of
the
characteristics
that
make
it
so
good
is
its
ability
to
maintain
an
atmosphere
that
I
described
last
year
as
“chill.”
Because
everyone
is
vetted,
because
everything
is
off
the
record,
because
no
one
is
trying
to
sell
you
anything,
participants
seem
unusually
relaxed,
unguarded,
approachable
and
engaging.
What
I
wrote
last
year
on
this
point
remains
true:
“No
one
was
too
big
or
important
to
approach,
or
too
unapproachable
because
they
were
surrounded
by
their
people.
Everyone
was
on
equal
footing,
and
everyone
engaged
as
co-equal
peers.”
Swarming
the
swag.
And
when
who-luck
did
strike
and
you
found
yourself
connecting
with
a
complete
stranger,
the
conversation
was
bound
to
be
fascinating.
To
double-click
on
what
I’ve
already
said:
The
people
who
attend
the
TLTF
Summit
are
truly
those
who
are
at
the
vanguard
of
legal
innovation,
across
a
range
of
roles.
It
is
also
a
conference
that
continues
to
be
defined
by
how
well
it
handles
the
smaller
details.
Two
in
particular
that
have
been
true
for
all
four
years
are:
-
Food.
It
is
ample
and
delicious.
Participants
are
served
breakfast,
lunch
and
dinner,
with
a
variety
of
both
healthy
and
indulgent
snacks
seemingly
always
available.
Menus
all
accommodated
the
vegetarians
and
pescatarians
among
us,
even
at
an
off-site
BBQ
party.
(This
pescatarian
was
particularly
grateful.) -
Swag.
I
have
said
before
and
will
say
it
again:
No
legal
tech
conference
does
swag
like
the
TLTF
Summit.
At
a
designated
hour,
the
swag
room
doors
opened,
and
you
would
think
they
had
announced
free
equity
in
the
latest
legal
AI
startup.
Accomplished
professionals
swarmed
the
room,
grabbing
hoodies
and
sweats
and
hats
and
cups
and
socks
and
all
sorts
of
other
paraphernalia.
Savvy
summit
veterans
knew
to
bring
extra-large
suitcases
to
get
all
their
goodies
back
home,
while
newbies
wondered
what
to
do
with
their
overflowing
bags.
Picking
Nits
While
the
summit
stands
out
for
so
many
of
its
macro
and
micro
details,
I
would
be
painting
a
one-sided
picture
if
I
did
not
also
mention
some
of
the
smaller
nits
that
I
heard
attendees
complain
about:
-
The
lack
of
an
app.
Ahead
of
the
conference,
TLTF
circulated
a
summit
“look
book,”
a
76-page
PDF
with
extensive
details
about
the
conference.
While
helpful
in
advance
as
a
planning
tool,
it
was
so
extensive
and
unwieldy
that
it
was
virtually
unusable
as
a
conference
guide.
In
fact,
the
cumbersomeness
of
the
PDF
inspired
one
enterprising
attendee,
Rob
Saccone,
chief
technology
officer
at
Lega
–
literally
while
at
the
airport
en
route
to
the
summit
–
to
create
an
AI
chat
interface
that
he
made
available
to
attendees
for
free.
During
the
conference,
TLTF
put
the
agenda
up
on
a
web
page,
but
it,
also,
was
not
user
friendly,
given
that
every
time
you
looked
at
it,
you
had
to
scroll
down
to
find
your
day
and
time.
As
it
turns
out,
here
is
an
app
for
that.
Why
not
use
it? -
Tiny
type
on
name
tags.
The
complaint
I
heard
most
often
was
about
the
tiny
typeface
used
to
show
names
on
badges
and
the
even
tinier
typeface
showing
affiliations.
I’m
guessing
this
was
done
to
encourage
people
to
engage
rather
than
just
read,
and
perhaps
also
to
separate
people
from
their
affiliations.
But
I
know
many
people
were
bothered
by
it. -
Lack
of
attendee
list.
With
name
tags
unreadable,
and
so
many
people
in
attendance,
it
would
have
been
nice
to
have
some
sort
of
attendee
list.
I
understand
that
the
organizers
want
everyone
to
feel
free
from
pitches
and
solicitations,
but
this
is
already
a
select
group,
one
that
is
already
vetted
in
advance.
Why
not
make
it
easier
for
attendees
to
follow
up
with
each
other?
Also
worth
noting
–
not
as
a
complaint,
but
as
information
for
anyone
thinking
of
attending
in
the
future
–
is
that
the
summit’s
primary
focus
is
on
BigLaw
and
corporate
legal.
As
evidence
of
this,
look
no
farther
than
the
law
firms
represented
on
the
speaker
roster:
A&O
Sherman,
Goodwin
Procter,
K&L
Gates,
Latham
&
Watkins,
Ogletree
Deakins,
Orrick
and
Skadden.
I
was
glad
to
see
one
program
on
“AI
and
the
Justice
Gap,”
which
looked
at
how
AI
tools
can
help
expand
access
to
justice.
I
was
not
able
to
attend
it,
so
I
cannot
comment
on
its
substance.
However,
I
was
surprised
to
see
that
panel’s
principal
speaker
as
the
chief
operating
officer
of
one
of
the
world’s
largest
law
firms.
That
said,
for
all
its
focus
on
BigLaw
and
corporate
legal,
there
is
room
to
wonder
whether
“who
luck”
could
extend
to
those
working
on
the
justice
gap.
Perhaps
that
is
next
year’s
growth
opportunity
–
not
just
in
numbers,
but
in
diversity
of
mission.
I
was
also
glad
to
see
several
panels
that
looked
at
issues
around
regulatory
reform,
non-lawyer
ownership,
and
the
like
–
some
of
which
also
touched
on
issues
of
access
to
justice.
Creating
Community
In
his
opening
keynote,
Zach
Posner
talked
about
the
power
of
community
–
the
power
of
bringing
together
people
who
are
working
on
similar
things
to
advance
their
common
goals.
“If
we
get
that
right,
we’re
not
only
helping
individuals
achieve,
but
we’re
helping
the
entire
community
and
the
entire
space
achieve
its
goals,”
he
said.
Later,
as
I
happened
into
one
of
those
who-luck
conversations
with
the
CEO
of
a
major
legal
tech
company,
he
used
that
same
word,
community,
to
describe
how
this
conference
was
like
no
other
he
has
attended.
The
TLTF
Summit
is
a
formula
that
combines
“who
luck”
with
“who’s
who”
to
create
a
community
of
like-minded
leaders
and
thinkers
and
to
spark
three
days
of
dialogue
and
engagement,
all
focused
on
the
future
of
legal
technology
and
legal
practice.
Having
attended
all
four
summits,
having
watched
it
already
quadruple
in
size,
I
am
almost
hesitant
to
publish
this
post.
Like
that
Austin
swimming
hole
the
locals
do
not
want
mapped
on
Google,
I
almost
wish
I
could
keep
this
a
secret
known
only
to
an
intimate
few.
That,
however,
would
be
not
only
selfish,
but
counterproductive.
It
would
also
be
impossible.
As
the
field
of
legal
technology
grows
exponentially,
so
too
will
this
summit.
Maybe
all
that
who-luck
won’t
run
out,
maybe
it
will
simply
evolve
and
expand.
The
challenge
for
organizers
is
not
whether
to
grow
–
that
ship
has
sailed
–
but
whether
they
can
maintain
the
magic
that
made
150
people
feel
like
they
had
found
something
special,
even
as
they
welcome
hundreds
more.