This is opinion, not reporting. The column cites no new data and no specific deal, and no regulatory, legislative, or corporate event sits behind it. Its timing matters because it arrives as legal departments face these decisions. The adoption figures it leans on come from other sources: the ILTA Technology Survey 2026 reports 94% of law firms using or exploring GenAI tools, and FTI Consulting and Relativity research, written by Ari Kaplan, puts general counsel AI use at 88%, up from 44% in 2025.
For attorneys, the practical value is in the questions. Ask who will own an internal tool after its builder leaves, and whether the institutional judgment built into it can be documented. Ask what measurable result a vendor purchase must produce. Set a specific date or event that will prompt a second look at any deferred decision. Peer positions are split: Ropes & Gray has said it is buying, while DLA Piper is weighing a proprietary platform against commercial tools. Market pressure runs toward buying, with Harvey and Legora each raising $550m this year. Thomson Reuters argues that the model can be rented while legal memory, risk policy, audit trail, and feedback loops stay in-house, a split worth testing against any proposed contract.