I also would want a lawyer to take a look. Hence the note saying to talk to a lawyer. ;)
The reality is, even knowing what to ask a lawyer can be difficult and it's not economically viable to ask a lawyer to summarize a 100-page legal document into text you can wrap your head around.
Detangle just helps give some clarity so that you can further a conversation with a lawyer, or even just ask for clarification from the person who sent you the document.
"Hey, this paragraph seems to imply XYZ...is that the case?"
I'm making zero claims that this should replace a lawyer or be used as a replacement for legally binding text.
> even knowing what to ask a lawyer can be difficult
That's the lawyer's job, to guide you through ! If they're not doing that, then find a different lawyer.
The whole point is we are talking about legal document review here.
Reviewing legal documents necessarily involves an active discussion with a lawyer, it is not something you can turn up with pre-prepared questions for.
> That's the lawyer's job, to guide you through ! If they're not doing that, then find a different lawyer.
Yes! And if you happen to know that, and have a good lawyer, then you're all set. But a hell of a lot of lawyers won't volunteer to do this, or aren't competent enough to have this conversation productively with a layperson, and most people don't know to ask for it.
I have my doubts as to the practicality, but a tool that could summarize and then prompt laypeople go to their lawyer to start that discussion seems like it could definitely have value. I suspect most people interested in this tool may already be knowledgeable enough to ask for a walkthrough anyway, but you could imagine implementations where the summary is presented directly, and could guide more people toward the help they need.
> competent enough to have this conversation productively with a layperson
HUH ? That is literally their job !
Legal document review is bread and butter for lawyers.
Having productive conversations with laypeople is what lawyers do all day every day.
I really don't get your point.
If a lawyer is unable to have a productive conversation with a layperson about a legal document, then they need to be stripped of their qualifications.
That’s not their job - their job is to make persuasive legal arguments, craft legal language to be ironclad, etc. Similarly a top researchers in CS isn’t employed for their ability to explain CS, despite the fact we employ them to do just that.
That's true, but you still should (try to) be prepared. Meeting with a lawyer will go much more smoothly if you have at least a rudimentary understanding of the subject matter, rather than having them explain everything to you from first principles.
> The reality is, even knowing what to ask a lawyer can be difficult and it's not economically viable to ask a lawyer to summarize a 100-page legal document into text you can wrap your head around.
A 100 page legal document (i.e. one with lots of stuff implied by structure and lots of specific subconditions and lots of case-specific stuff that might make more sense in conjunction with the examples in the appendix) sounds like the sort of thing AI would be wrong about far more often than it was right...
At least reading a short contract or EULA I'd be pretty confident an AI-based system would have lots of similar contracts and plain English explanations in its corpus and correctly identify the boilerplate exclusions and even if it misinterpreted stuff like IP assignments and ability to modify the agreement it might be slightly better than Ctrl-F at figuring out which clauses do this. Although from what I can see the current incarnation is working on a paragraph by paragraph basis so doesn't even necessarily apply definitions defined in the section above correctly...
Question: how much would it cost to consult a lawyer about a 100 page document? How does one even go about doing something like this? I've never really needed to do that, so I'm genuinely curious.
The reality is, even knowing what to ask a lawyer can be difficult and it's not economically viable to ask a lawyer to summarize a 100-page legal document into text you can wrap your head around.
Detangle just helps give some clarity so that you can further a conversation with a lawyer, or even just ask for clarification from the person who sent you the document.
"Hey, this paragraph seems to imply XYZ...is that the case?"
I'm making zero claims that this should replace a lawyer or be used as a replacement for legally binding text.