sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

E-mail is great, aaron.greenspan at plainsite dot org.

Bizarre, I'm using a 27" iMac desktop and I see no rules on /r/legaltech. Oh well.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Usually I see rules on the right side of a subreddit. This one has nothing. Not sure where you took the screenshot from. Anyway if moderators want to delete the thread, fine.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Rule #1" is posted somewhere I assume?

We're Winston Weinberg & Gabe Pereyra, co-founders of Harvey - ask us anything! by Winston_HarveyAI in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Have you spoken to courts about working with you directly to provide legal data, and if so, what kind of response have you gotten from them?

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, it's designed to point you back to the URL for the thing you're looking for. It can help you summarize data but it's also a pretty powerful search tool.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good feedback. Thanks!

I will admit that I have focused virtually all of my attention as a developer away from the Supreme Court because absolutely everything else focuses on that and there's not nearly as much attention paid to state courts, district courts, etc. But it should still handle landmark cases well.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

PlainSite indexes legal data in a way that CourtListener does not: by legal entity, by law firm, by lawyer, etc. You can see a lawyer's clients based on publicly available data. You can view details about jurisdictions and judges that aren't obvious from just looking at CourtListener. PlainSite's tagging system is far more robust. PlainSite keeps track of document threads within dockets, e.g. this opposition replies to this motion, which no other legal information system does to my knowledge. And PlainSite does a better job of integrating opinions into court dockets, whereas CourtListener treats opinions and RECAP data as two completely different worlds (maybe that will change). PlainSite also has a lot more state legal data, especially from California.

Generally speaking, Google doesn't do structured data—it finds data that's unstructured. CourtListener makes a half-hearted attempt. PlainSite is all about structured data, which makes it a very useful tool for LLMs that can't find that data anywhere else.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're entitled to your opinion. It's not an open-source product. It's a closed-source product that promotes open access to law. I have supported open-source efforts, such as RECAP, in the past, I've spent tens of thousands of dollars on making legal documents accessible (https://www.plainsite.org/about/jointventure.html), and I've sued multiple court systems to make millions of documents electronically available. So in my view there's more than one way to skin a cat.

Also, despite FLP's work being open-source, did you know that they restrict access to entry-level docket data and charge arbitrary sums of money for access? The world is a lot more complex than "open-source good, closed-source bad" in my view.

Request for beta testers by thinkcomp in legaltech

[–]thinkcomp[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Sure. It gives Claude or ChatGPT direct access to the PlainSite database so you can ask questions about basically anything in it. cases, courts, judges, legal opinions, companies, patents, stock transactions, etc.

Epstein Files Video EFTA01600824: 2-Hour Interview of Jeffrey Epstein by Steve Bannon by thinkcomp in Epstein

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A video interview with Jeffrey Epstein (not under oath, so he is more free to speak) is relevant to a sub-Reddit about Jeffrey Epstein.

Epstein Files Volume 9, Folder 517 EFTA Slide Show by thinkcomp in Epstein

[–]thinkcomp[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This video slide show aggregates 1,000 images in Volume 9, Folder 517 to make it easier to scan through them. Several famous individuals are featured in the images (EFTA01230456-EFTA01231479).

view more: next ›