One in five legal AI companies now sells legal work

Last week we published where the legal AI money went. The obvious next question was what the money bought, so we went through all 95 companies and catalogued every product each one markets by name. That is 264 products, grouped into 18 types.

We expected the interesting part to be what the products do. It was not. The interesting part is what kind of company is selling them.

Nineteen of them sell legal work, not software

Twenty-five of the 264 products are not software. They are legal services: a licensed firm doing the work, with AI behind it.

They come in two shapes. Some were born as firms. Crosby reviews contracts at a fixed fee and carries malpractice insurance. Keith and Conveyd do English residential conveyancing at a published price. Lawhive, Moritz, General Legal and Soxton sell flat-fee legal work to consumers and startups.

The other shape is newer and stranger: software companies that bolted a law firm onto the side. Norm Ai sells compliance software and also runs Norm Law. Eudia sells an in-house platform and also runs Eudia Counsel. EvenUp sells case software and also runs the pre-litigation department outright. Aavalynx sells dispute analytics and operates a sister firm that competes with the firms buying the analytics.

In the US, the mechanism enabling most of this is Arizona's alternative business structure licence, which permits non-lawyer ownership of a law firm. Boundless, Justpoint and Eudia all hold one. The line between "legal tech vendor" and "law firm" is not blurring gradually. In these nineteen companies it has already gone.

There is essentially no consumer legal software

Fourteen products in the whole catalogue are sold to someone handling a legal problem without a lawyer. Thirteen of those fourteen are legal services rather than tools: a firm, a forms specialist, an attorney on a flat fee. Useful, often cheaper than the alternative, but somebody else doing the work.

Strip those out and the software a person can actually operate on their own behalf, across $6.2 billion and 95 companies, is DoNotPay — which after the FTC's 2025 order no longer describes itself as a lawyer — a divorce chatbot whose own site says it gives no legal advice, and a do-it-yourself forms plan.

We are not neutral about this, so read it with that in mind. But the count is the count.

A published price tells you who a product is for

Most of these companies do not publish pricing. The ones that do are almost all selling to individuals.

midpage starts at $30 a month. Paxton is $499 a month per seat, aimed at solos. GC AI publishes $500 a month for solo and fractional general counsel. Twin1 charges per person rather than per firm. Skribe posts $379 per record hour for a deposition. Keith posts £1,200 to buy a house.

The pattern holds in reverse too. Streamline AI publishes "from $22,900 a year" and Zuva publishes $10,000–$75,000 per diligence review — both enterprise, both productized enough to name a number.

Everyone else wants a call first. That is a reasonable way to sell six-figure enterprise software. It is also, in practice, a filter: if you have to ask, the product is not for you.

What almost nobody is building

The thinnest categories in the catalogue are worth as much attention as the crowded ones. Thirty-two products are agent platforms and infrastructure — the most crowded type by some distance. Meanwhile:

• Transcription and the record: 3 products, all from one company.
• Entity and governance records: 4.
• Medical records and demand packages: 6, in the practice area that has absorbed more legal AI capital than any other.

Disclosure: the record is our own category, so treat that first line as an interested observation rather than a neutral one. We were still surprised. The transcript is the document a court treats as what happened, and three products in a 264-product market are pointed at it.

Both pages are live

The funding survey and the product catalogue link to each other by company — open any company's row and you can jump straight to what it sells.

Product names change faster than funding rounds, and the line between a product and a feature is genuinely blurry at several companies. Assume this is accurate as of late August 2026 and not much longer. Nothing here is legal advice, and nothing here is a recommendation of any product; we have not tested them.