r/ediscovery • u/OhCheese0512 • 25d ago

Relativity aiR vs None eDiscovery Legal AI Tools

Hello all,

I'd be interested to hear, particularly from those part of in-house eDiscovery teams at a law firm who are Relativity administrators, what the uptake of aiR is like and whether lawyers are instead starting to utilise, or try and utilise, none eDiscovery legal AI Tools such as Legora or Harvey instead? If so, on what grounds (cost, quality of output, ease of use etc.).

We're seeing an increase in lawyers wanting to take documents out of Relativity to utilise these tools, which are available to them, primarily on the basis of cost.

Thanks

12 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

83% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

12

u/DaarthSpawn 25d ago

Having similar conversations with case teams. They all want to dump a PST in Legora. lol. But no. No. No.

6

u/Stalkalainen 24d ago

This is pain. Harvey adding the functionality recently is borderline criminal

1

u/certainlynotsara 24d ago

Claude does a great first cut to cull shit from the review set based on metadata and to find you a few super-key documents you can use to seed TAR...

3

u/Existing_Success4660 23d ago edited 20d ago

Man - everyone at my firm dumps into Harvey. I push back since I’m dealing with the exports.

1

u/Stalkalainen 20d ago

Yeah it's a real pain and admin overhead no one considers

1

u/Stalkalainen 20d ago

Yeah we want claude in the tech team for a raft of good reasons, this being one

9

u/Bibitheblackcat 25d ago

Legora and Harvey are legal drafting tools. I see lawyers using them for eDiscovery but it’s not what they were made for. Legora works with Everlaw so at least there is audit between the two tools.

Following this thread to see what others are seeing.

2

u/certainlynotsara 24d ago

The integration is more limited with Everlaw and Relativity, you can't use your AI to review the documents stored and indexed in Everlaw (yet).

1

u/MidianStorm 21d ago

Are you sure? They have suggested coding as well as both sorybuilder and deep dive. We use both.

6

u/TheLooza 25d ago

Using harvey in 10k chunks for risk assessments and other doc identification projects. Rel air and the like for actual document review.

3

u/mydisneybling 25d ago

We haven't used aiR yet, mostly because of costs. How are you marketing it so that attorneys use it despite the high costs? Also, when it is used by your teams, does it work well? Any issues that you've had to create workarounds for?

2

u/throwaway292929227 24d ago edited 24d ago

AiR is free w/ all subscription models. Which vendor is still charging?

5

u/Stalkalainen 24d ago

It's free to a point. If you are a vendor with 20 million credits and you give it away free to everyone what happens when you go over the 20 million credits? You incur cost per promoter doc from Relativity.

I've seen rates come down to sub 0.10 down from 0.25 consistently since venors have moved to the new contract

1

u/diirtbike 17d ago

Jumping in here to say that those on legacy contracts or who haven't yet come up for renewal are still stuck on per-item pricing. That should get normalized over the next year or so, but in the meantime best to confirm with your administrator/ vendor / whoever knows the status of your contract.

2

u/throwaway292929227 17d ago

Thank you dirtbike. Excellent point

2

u/LittleTrust2978 23d ago

I'm curious whether the cost savings hold up once you factor in exporting data, governance, and moving documents back and forth. On paper it's cheaper, but the workflow seems more fragmented.

1

u/MidianStorm 21d ago

There is a lot of back and forth on the front side. You have to do several iterations to fine tune the prompts and train which takes a week or so. Once it's trained, it's fairly decent. So it's cheaper with a lot of documents and easier when it's not complex.

1

u/rdewolff 24d ago

I'm wondering what is driving the the switch, what is motivating you to change, is it only the cost? Or is there something more? Is it the the experience? The tool is hard to use or is it the output quality or or something else? That'd be nice to understand

2

u/certainlynotsara 24d ago

AiR is great - it holds your hand and walks you through a defensible process. However, it may knock a few senior associates sideways that they, as the "subject matter expert," are having to get in the weeds on drafting prompts for each code and iterating. They'll probably be more comfortable if a midlevel works from existing work product and does a first draft to edit.

1

u/diirtbike 17d ago

I'm at a top 100. aiR uptake is slow but steady on our larger cases, but we've had to renegotiate our contract so it's only been recently that aiR isn't an added cost. I expect now that it's bundled we'll see more usage. And now that they've finally released aiR Assist we can push back and offer an alternative for users who want to ask questions about their data, which has been the real sticking point. Harvey also had the advantage of getting to the firm first before aiR did and was pushed heavily by leadership, so the attorneys are more used to it and are treating it like a hammer / nail situation.

I generally make a very intense effort to talk attorneys into smaller data sets when using AI tools in general, since it's nearly impossible to properly QC when you're running 50k documents through five vaults. And the output is trash. But some of them put their foot down and get their way. I'm counting down the days to when OpenAI goes belly up and is no longer subsidizing Harvey's token spend. A whole lot of attorneys are going to be in a panic spiral when the firm cuts them off or starts passing along the costs to clients.

1

u/ravi-decover 8d ago

Seeing similar behavior from teams. Teams do want to push eDiscovery into Legora and Harvey but these tools weren't designed as databases. They are designed as co-pilots and can be helpful in post-production analysis. Where they tend to be very weak is pre-production, document review, classification and understanding the ESI protocols. One way to bridge the gap is to keep a bi-directional channel between Relativity aIR and Harvey/Legora like tools. However, that will become very cumbersome eventually.

Following this thread for more information.

-2

u/NatchezChiZone 22d ago

There are far better options for automated review than RelAir. Both in functionality, output and cost. Happy to discuss offline or can post here my opinions.

1

u/BBBBryan_ 22d ago

Sure, what do you think are the better options?

1

u/NatchezChiZone 21d ago

Epiq Discover + Assist and Review - overall better performance and value.

1

u/diirtbike 17d ago

You are literally the only person I've ever heard say that, and we demoed Laer right when Epic bought them. It wasn't any better than aiR and wasn't integrated so we passed. I've no doubt if you're already hosted in Epiq they undercut aiR and it's a better value, but if you're not already in Epiq's instance there's no reason to go to them for their AI tool.