Last
week,
legal
tech
stocks
in
companies
like
Thomson
Reuters
and
RELX
(Lexis’
parent)
plummeted
in
response
to
Anthropic’s
release
of
legal
plug-ins
for
its
AI
product,
Claude.
According
to
TechCrunch,
the
plug-ins
will
handle
specialized
tasks
like
document
review
and
contract
drafting,
and
produce
more
consistent
outcomes.
Here
at
Above
the
Law,
Stephen
Embry
predicted
that
GenAI
giants
like
Anthropic
will
gobble
up
large
chunks
of
the
enterprise
legal
tech
space.
But
in
the
solo
and
small
space,
I
don’t
see
a
real
upset
to
the
status
quo
any
time
soon.
For
starters,
non-legal
tech
tools
have
always
competed
with
specialized
legal
tech
products
in
the
solo
and
small
firm
space.
Solos
have
always
had
access
to
cloud-based
platforms
like
Google
Drive,
Basecamp,
Monday,
Airtable,
and
even
Outlook
to
run
their
practices.
Many
of
these
general-purpose
tools
actually
preceded
the
launch
of
Clio
and
MyCase,
today’s
market
leaders
in
cloud-based
practice
management
software.
In
fact,
every
edition
of
my
book
on
starting
a
law
firm,
Solo
by
Choice,
since
2008
has
included
a
dedicated
section
comparing
the
pros
and
cons
of
non-legal
tech
tools
with
legal-specific
platforms.
In
short,
the
idea
that
a
big
tech
company
might
offer
a
cheaper
alternative
to
legal
tech
isn’t
exactly
breaking
news
for
this
segment
of
the
market.
Yet
even
though
general
purpose
tools
(first
practice
management
and
now
AI)
have
always
been
available
to
the
solo/small
firm
market
at
lower
cost,
inertia
has
consistently
pushed
solos
toward
legal
applications.
After
all,
most
solos
and
small
firms,
especially
just
starting
out,
get
the
bulk
of
their
information
about
legal
products
from
resource-constrained
bar
associations
that
rely
on
hefty
sponsorships
from
legal
vendors
in
exchange
for
member
access.
A
lawyer
launching
a
law
firm
today
is
going
to
hear
about
Clio
or
MyCase
at
a
CLE
or
through
a
bar
association
discount
program
long
before
they
stumble
across
a
YouTube
video
showing
how
to
deploy
Gemini
or
Claude
in
legal
practice.
Bar
affiliation
also
conveys
to
legal
products
an
imprimatur
of
professional
legitimacy
and
trustworthiness.
Just
as
nobody
ever
got
fired
for
hiring
IBM,
many
solos
and
smalls
believe
that
no
one
ever
was
disciplined
for
relying
on
Westlaw/Lexis/fill
in
the
blank.
[Author
FYI:
That’s
no
longer
true
when
it
comes
to
hallucinations.]
And
there’s
the
tech
capacity
issue.
Solo
and
small
firms
don’t
typically
have
a
deep
tech
bench.
For
many,
the
appeal
of
a
law
practice
management
platform
is
that
right
off
the
shelf,
it
does
80
percent
of
the
tasks
law
firm
owners
need,
from
intake
forms,
payment
processing,
calendaring,
client
portals,
and
even
legal
research
with
Clio’s
vLex
acquisition.
As
powerful
as
Claude’s
Legal
Skills
may
be,
they’re
also
a
strictly
DIY
operation.
Claude
skills
are
open-source
files
hosted
on
GitHub
that
need
to
be
downloaded
into
Claude
Cowork,
which
itself
needs
to
be
installed
and
configured.
For
solos
who
haven’t
even
opened
up
a
chat
window
on
ChatGPT,
that’s
a
pretty
big
stretch.
Now
that’s
not
to
say
that
general
purpose
AI
tools
won’t
ever
make
in-roads
in
the
solo/small
firm
space.
There’s
a
place
for
general
AI
at
either
end
of
the
solo
growth
curve.
Starting
out,
both
cash-strapped
and
tech-savvy
solos
will
opt
for
general
over
legal
AI
either
because
they
have
the
skill
to
deploy
it
or
lack
an
affordable
alternative.
Down
the
road,
for
those
small
firms
that
edge
towards
10
or
more
team
members,
multiple
seats
can
become
cost
prohibitive
or
legal
platforms
may
prove
too
rigid
to
accommodate
a
firm’s
unique
workflows
and
protocols.
At
that
point,
some
firms
will
look
beyond
Clio
or
MyCase
to
explore
general
AI
solutions
or
to
build
custom
tools
and
implement
more
agentic
workflows.
But
significantly,
by
the
time
a
firm
reaches
that
stage,
it
typically
has
the
resources
to
bring
on
a
developer
or
consultant.
In
most
cases,
it’s
not
the
head
of
the
firm
who’s
configuring
plug-ins
and
tinkering
with
markdown
skill
files
at
midnight.
Don’t
get
me
wrong.
Right
now,
general
AI
tools
are
cheaper
and
more
powerful
(not
to
mention
equally
secure)
as
their
legal
tech
counterparts.
Solo
and
small
firm
lawyers
who
don’t
take
the
time
to
familiarize
themselves
with
the
basics
of
general
AI
tools
are
missing
out
on
tremendous
cost
savings
and
quality
improvements.
But
having
been
in
the
solo
and
small
firm
space
as
long
as
I
have,
I
know
that
at
the
end
of
the
day,
bar
associations
wield
more
influence
over
technology
choices
than
economics
or
markets.
The
choice
between
gen
AI
versus
legal
AI
is
just
the
latest
chapter
in
a
continuing
saga
of
cheap-but-DIY
versus
pricier-but-turnkey
solutions.
And
the
ending
is
always
the
same:
some
lawyers
will
innovate
but
the
vast
majority
will
stick
with
legal
tools.
In
other
words,
they’ll
choose
IBM.
Carolyn
Elefant
is
one
of
the
country’s
most
recognized
advocates
for
solo
and
small
firm
lawyers.
She
founded
MyShingle.com
in
2002,
the
longest-running
blog
for
solo
practitioners,
where
she
has
published
thousands
of
articles,
resources,
and
guides
on
starting,
running,
and
growing
independent
law
practices.
She
is
the
author
of
Solo
by
Choice,
widely
regarded
as
the
definitive
handbook
for
launching
and
sustaining
a
law
practice,
and
has
spoken
at
countless
bar
events
and
legal
conferences
on
technology,
innovation,
and
regulatory
reform
that
impacts
solos
and
smalls.
Elefant
also
develops
practical
tools
like
the AI
Teach-In to
help
small
firms
adopt
AI
and
she
consistently
champions
reforms
to
level
the
playing
field
for
independent
lawyers.
Alongside
this
work,
she
runs
the
Law
Offices
of
Carolyn
Elefant,
a
national
energy
and
regulatory
practice
that
handles
selective
complex,
high-stakes
matters.