As Orrick Becomes 3rd Big Law Investor, Will Reynen Court Dominate as the Gatekeeper of Legal Tech?

Never before has a single legal tech company received so much direct financial support from Big Law firms, nor has one company gained a position where it could potentially dominate a large part of the legal tech market as a gatekeeper.

First it was Clifford Chance and Latham & Watkins, now it’s Orrick that has put money into ‘legal app store’ Reynen Court (see below), in a move that cements the platform’s position in the world of Big Law.

But, more importantly it sends a message to the software market that says: ‘We, Big Law, want to consume our legal tech products through a platform – not via one-to-one buyer/seller relationships with a variety of SaaS point solutions. And, that platform’s name is Reynen Court.’

Let’s just step back for a moment and consider what the change means.

Put simply Reynen Court allows you to use a collection of SaaS applications via its platform, which handles issues such as data security guarantees. And, as the US-based company puts it: ‘The platform enables firms to manage software subscriptions and provides usage monitoring and advanced application-specific metrics to aid in better predictability of IT software and infrastructure maintenance and expenditure.’

On one level you could say this is not a big deal, Reynen Court is just the wrapper, as it were, not the end product. But, then consider this point – we could get to a scenario where many of the world’s largest law firms are consuming a big chunk of the SaaS legal tech market via an intermediary.

I.e. Reynen Court could become, in effect, the gatekeeper of legal tech. And that is quite a position to hold.

Look at it this way, Big Law – as seen with Orrick and others – gets fully behind Reynen, the firms’ CTOs and CIOs become used to this relationship and perhaps even start to feel uneasy about using any SaaS software that’s not running through Reynen.

In that scenario the platform would have a position of considerable power, unrivalled and never seen before in the legal tech market.

Let’s say you’re a tech company and you choose not to go onto the Reynen platform, what then? Do you eventually get shut out of the Big Law buyer’s club?

What if for some reason your tech company falls out with Reynen Court, what then? Or, your company has its application rejected? If most Big Law firms only use point solutions via this platform, then you’d be out in the cold, exiled from the market. Perhaps even to a point where your business loses so many large customers that your viability is threatened?

In short, whether it’s planned or not, Reynen could eventually end up in a controlling position in the market – and Artificial Lawyer has to say, that’s not a healthy scenario for a free market to have.

What started out innocently enough as a way to help lawyers more easily use software point solutions, could evolve into legal tech’s self-appointed gatekeeper. Moreover, a gatekeeper backed by some of the world’s largest firms, which makes it even harder for any tech companies that don’t like the idea from speaking out – as they’d likely not want to criticise potential clients.

All in all, while helping to improve access to applications should be applauded, a situation where the legal tech market was effectively dominated by one platform would be a bad thing for a free market.

Some of Reynen Court’s Consortium members, inc. three firms that have made direct investments. That’s a powerful group.

We are not there yet. As it stands today, most law firms have one-to-one relationships with the many SaaS companies they use. And, Reynen Court, has only today fully launched on a commercial basis (Jan 31), so it is still at a very early stage.

But, just in case, here’s a few ideas to avoid one company getting into a dominant gatekeeper position:

  • Another group of law firms creates a rival platform of the same style, which would give the SaaS companies at least some choice of which platform to jump onto.
  • A group of SaaS companies get together and create their own intermediary platform – maybe for tech that was complementary; or maybe even competitors would come together in the name of mutual interest? (And of course, we’ve seen several larger companies try to build their own all-in-one platforms.)
  • The legal tech companies agree on some universal standards, especially around security (and perhaps on pricing?), and make it as easy as possible for law firms to use their software, which in turn would make the potential for a dominating gatekeeper less likely.

The Orrick investment

As noted the US firm has joined Clifford Chance and Latham & Watkins in investing in Reynen Court. This is what everyone had to say:

Don Keller, Orrick’s Tech & Innovation Sector Leader, said: ‘When we launched our legal tech focused corporate venture investment fund, it was with exactly this kind of investment in mind.Andy and his team have made great strides over the past year, and we are excited to continue to support their efforts.’

Wendy Butler Curtis, Chief Innovation Officer and Chair of eDiscovery & Information Governance Group at Orrick, said:  ‘We hear from our clients again and again that the adoption of legal technology is hindered by the resources needed to vet, pilot and contract for a new solution.  The Reynen Court platform simplifies these steps,  accelerating our clients’ ability to leverage new technology – which is a win for all of us.’

And, Andrew Klein, Founder and CEO of Reynen Court, concluded: ‘As a member of our Consortium and one of the five Beta firms, [Orrick] have played an instrumental role in helping us refine our priorities and test drive our application.  We look forward to expanding the relationship and working even more closely with their global teams as we head into our commercial launch.’


  1. I am afraid you misunderstand Reynen Court and our aspirations. We do not get between the sellers and buyers of legal tech. We simply provide a single platform through which firms can manage cloud software in private clouds under their control. All vendors are welcome and the standards are open. The law firms want standardization and a way to adopt and run modern software without sacrificing security or stability. Vendors do not have to share revenue with us. The industry desperately needs costs and friction to go down and moving hundreds of data center based apps to an equal number of disparate SaaS apps is not going to help anyone.

    • I understand where you’re coming from, Andrew. At the same time, there is a subtle risk brewing at the bottom of the platform. Yes, law firms do want standardization (in the modern era, most do). But when there is a distinct classification/certification of that standard, it becomes a gatekeeper for smaller tech groups (or law tech companies, in this case). I do see that Reynen Court currently functions as a middle-man as the soft-touch gatekeeper [certification, integration with the software company’s cloud environment, etc] and the customer/firm [providing IT cost to value, for example].

      Understand that even though the aspirations are novel and, quite frankly, required in an ever-expanding (and frequently impounding) industry there is an external view of how this all plays out from both sides of the equation.

  2. Good analysis Richard – and, who are you kidding, Andrew? You absolutely ARE getting in between the sellers and buyers – and, taking a piece of the action – that’s the whole point, isn’t it? Or, am I wrong and this is a public service, not-for-profit initiative?

    I remain unconvinced in this one. I see the potential value for some smaller vendors and smaller shops, but, not for the big players.

    By the way, this is my own opinion, not the opinion of my firm. I am speaking purely on my own personal behalf and as someone who previously was responsible for purchasing software for several law firms.

  3. Interesting read and great to see progress that will help drive technology adoption by law firms and their clients. While the concern regarding one organization controlling access to a significant percentage of legal technology is understandable, the market will continue to evolve and there will continue to be innovative ways that attorneys can access technology. The legal market is incredibly fragmented and there are already alternatives, such as Theorem, which promotes technology usage while solving problems such as lack of single sign on and unnecessary expense associated with subscribing to numerous redundant platforms. Theorem, Reynen Court and other legal tech initiatives that promote and drive technology usage to make lawyers more effective and efficient are gaining traction — any solution that helps attorneys and their clients be more effective and efficient is a good thing. All that said, What You DO is who you are, and the people we surround ourselves with matters.

2 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Meet Theorem: The New LegalTech App Store + More – Artificial Lawyer
  2. Reynen Court Bags $4.5m More, CC + Latham Invest Again – Artificial Lawyer

Comments are closed.