Reasons to reject Harvey / Legora
Hey all. I need a bit of help here.
I’m part of a full service firm with about 100+ lawyers. We’ve been trying out a bunch of legal AI tools the past couple of years and our Technology Committee have more or less decided to subscribe for Claude enterprise firm-wide and a smaller local AI tool specifically for research.
However, some of the older Partners are keen on us looking more into Harvey / Legora. Personally, I think they’re just caught up with the hype of Harvey and Legora being the shiny new toys that a lot of international firms are using.
We actually tried Harvey early last year but its usefulness didn’t justify the cost back then. Legora, admittedly we haven’t trialed yet but I’m personally not expecting much.
Anyway, if any of you have been using Harvey and Legora, could you let me know your experience?
I know a lot of redditors in here have said they’re basically ChatGPT / Claude wrappers - and that’s why I’d rather just get Claude too. But then I think not everyone is gonna be able to know how to prompt Claude as efficiently with skills and plugins to maximise legal work usage, whereas (I imagine) something like Harvey and Legora are more user friendly.