
Continuing the
previously begun .
One of the key problems with communications for a project to automate the production of legal content is that the objections and concerns associated with it contradict each other.
')
On the one hand, legally competent documents are significantly undervalued in small companies.
To be honest, they are often underestimated in large companies, but there it is methodologically differently designed, therefore, this is somehow not right now.
People sincerely believe that it is enough to take a contract fish from the Internet for free and correct it a little. Very little. This is just necessary to attach to the account, the main thing that the money came, prepayment, and then we will understand. The fact that the prepayment can be returned and with fines up to the pile is somehow overlooked. “We have been working under this agreement for several years and everything has always been good,” - the favorite phrase of a good half of my familiar studio leaders.
The contract in general can concoct a manager on the basis of what is unknown, without particularly reading anything except the description of the work and the amount to be paid. Easy.
This undervaluation leads to the fact that even the measly 500 rubles, which FreshDoc takes as a contract, seem to be a significant amount. Despite the fact that the lawyer would take a few thousand. In fact, we are competing with sites where ten buckets are poured for standard contract fish, I don’t want to take it. The fish there are obviously figs, because the main task of such a site is to sell you the services of a lawyer when you mess around with what you download. And therefore, the harder you will be, the more reliable the prospect of sale. Amen.
But at the same time, contractual work is greatly overvalued.
Contracts go to lawyers, there they start Very Important Agreements and AMENDMENTS. And all this is very important and difficult. Here we will correct the wording for a synonym here and here. And so every time, despite the fact that there is no significant difference between this contract and the one signed that week. And the one that is, fits into a fully automated variability.
A significant part of this activity is indulging the scratching of an ego lawyer. And ensuring his sense of utility. Methodologically, the lawyer is the same sysadmin. When everything is well done in advance, it is not visible and not audible, although it is mega-priced at times of crisis, well, this “I cannot be seen” actually requires some background work. And in general is a sign of quality.
A typical objection of a lawyer against automation is an appeal to nuances that absolutely must be taken into account, to the fact that contractual work is a delicate matter and so on. What is really true about half the time, or a little less. But does not negate the existence of the other half.
And in that place there is a third problem, because our product does not really fight lawyers, but helps them. It reduces the load on routine work, monitors current legislation, correctly renumbers footnotes from point to point when their composition or quantity changes. According to statistics, more than a third of our regular subscribers are lawyers. And we would like them to be more. BUT!
But at the same time we are hiring that a significant part of them hides that they use FreshDoc, because they are afraid that they may be considered incompetent if they use a designer. And this is despite the fact that, in non-core tasks, we facilitate their life radically, not by 40-50%, as in profile work, but dozens of times in time, if, say, a lawyer was asked to suddenly make some kind of agreement outside the usual sphere company activities.
And what is great: the exaggerated for the convexity and clarity of the thesis in any of these three sectors necessarily work in support of the objections of the other two. It is clear that in narrow areas you can choose one of the three maxims and work with it. But if for lawyers such platforms are relatively clear, then the rest already has great difficulties.