Legalweek Innovation Competition is Looking for New Answers to Old Problems
The Product Innovation Competition will feature new innovations developed specifically to service the many different sectors of the legal industry. Judges are looking for innovations that can bring big change in creative ways.
December 14, 2018 at 07:00 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Legal Tech News
At the Product Innovation Competition during this year's Legalweek (Jan. 28- 31), technologists will assemble to show off the next generation of data analytics, e-discovery and legal research tools. An awards presentation will be held on Thursday, Jan. 31 on the Legaltech LITE stage, presided over by a panel of four judges who are spending their holiday season trying to whittle a slew of applications down into a selection of six finalists.
Haley Altman, who's moonlighting as a judge in addition to her day job as the founder and CEO of the project management platform Doxly, believes the competition has come along at critical time in the relationship between the legal and technology sectors.
"We've kind of been behind every other industry in terms of adopting technology or trying to find ways to fit it into our practice," Altman said.
Some of that can be attributed to industry-specific hurdles inherent to the practice of law. Tech products that are developed with a broad marketplace in mind typically don't take into consideration things like attorney-client privilege or confidentiality rules.
According to Altman, emerging companies are beginning to craft innovations with the legal sector in mind. The Product Innovation Competition could double as a showcase for firms looking to streamline or update their business models.
"By giving people a way to see what those new developments and enhancements are and how they might help with the overall delivery of legal services, I think that it's so important to have this sort of a competition," Altman said.
Judges will be evaluating applicants across several key categories, including design, functionality, applicability and whether or not there is a clear market need. The last one can be especially tricky to nail down.
In the past, people have pitched Altman business ideas that she thought were interesting—just not to a degree that would inspire the average consumer to open their wallet. Plus there are some problems that even the most advanced technology can't solve.
"Just identifying that there's a problem doesn't mean that there's something that's going to solve it. Some things are just inherent to how we practice. It may not be efficient, it may not be great, but there's just no way to change it," Altman said.
Fellow judge Silvia Hodges Silverstein estimates she's made it through at least a third of the submissions so far, a process that has to be balanced against her job as the executive director of the Buying Legal Council.
Silverstein has been involved in the buying side of legal services for over a decade and is familiar enough with the status quo that she's looking for entries that have the potential to shake things up. Everybody claims to be unique, but some of the competitors have been better at articulating the "why" of it all than others.
"I'm definitely starting to have my favorites," Silverstein said.
She thinks that innovations that draw upon AI learning to distinguish patterns and draw conclusions from linguistics will be especially impactful to the legal industry moving forward.
"I think that that will be something in our industry in particular where so much is based on language is going to be changing the market more than it already has in the last few years," Silverstein said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHighest-Earning Partners May Be Looking to Cash In on Early Retirement
5 minute readGrayRobinson Opens Office in Pensacola, Marking First New Office Since 2019
3 minute readFrost Enters Arizona Market With Acquisition of Litigation Boutique
Trending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250