Docracy - Free (community curated) Legal Documents(docracy.com)
docracy.com
Docracy - Free (community curated) Legal Documents
http://www.docracy.com/
55 comments
There's likely two different scenarios to consider.
The one we don't want to happen is: "I don't need a lawyer, I used that Docracy thing. I'm set."
The one that is an improvement is: "Well, I've got about $250 left in the bank, its that Docracy thing or the back of this napkin..."
The one we don't want to happen is: "I don't need a lawyer, I used that Docracy thing. I'm set."
The one that is an improvement is: "Well, I've got about $250 left in the bank, its that Docracy thing or the back of this napkin..."
I would like to see when the documents have been litigated and under what circumstances. But of course that information is really hard to come by some times.
That being said, if they invested their time and energy into taking the output of the Superior Court docket and documents used there and the arguments made for and against the documents. Well that would be a really cool service.
That being said, if they invested their time and energy into taking the output of the Superior Court docket and documents used there and the arguments made for and against the documents. Well that would be a really cool service.
That would not help. Supreme Court filings are so specialized that they generally only apply to cases being heard before the Supreme Court. The documents underlying the cases litigated before the Supreme Court (i.e., contracts, etc.) are generally not analyzed by appellate courts in any detail unless they are specifically relevant to a discussion of the legal issues being contested before the court.
Wasn't really thinking about Supreme Court filings, I was thinking the more mundane civil filings that happen day in and day out in say Santa Clara County Superior Court [1] where you can get a copy of all the documents filed in all the cases where the judge hasn't ordered the documents sealed.
I realize its kind of an odd thing to do, but you can go down to any US court house and just sit in the gallery and listen/watch. There are people who do this for Groklaw when they were following every bit of the SCO/Novell litigation.
The Novell/SCO case (and Groklaw for that matter) provide what I think would be a great service (when combined with copies of the original documents) so in the Novell/SCO case there were agreements about the assignment of copyright (or not) and how they were pleaded both by the defense and the prosecution. Reading how they were attacked and how they were defended gives tremendous insights into how such documents get litigated. Of course it costs time and money to have someone do that, but that (rather than just copying various public web sources for documents) would provide a real value proposition for someone who was trying to either come up with a document for this or wanted to know what questions/guidance they should give their attorney who is preparing such a document.
[1] http://www.scscourt.org/self_help/civil/faqs/docket.shtml
I realize its kind of an odd thing to do, but you can go down to any US court house and just sit in the gallery and listen/watch. There are people who do this for Groklaw when they were following every bit of the SCO/Novell litigation.
The Novell/SCO case (and Groklaw for that matter) provide what I think would be a great service (when combined with copies of the original documents) so in the Novell/SCO case there were agreements about the assignment of copyright (or not) and how they were pleaded both by the defense and the prosecution. Reading how they were attacked and how they were defended gives tremendous insights into how such documents get litigated. Of course it costs time and money to have someone do that, but that (rather than just copying various public web sources for documents) would provide a real value proposition for someone who was trying to either come up with a document for this or wanted to know what questions/guidance they should give their attorney who is preparing such a document.
[1] http://www.scscourt.org/self_help/civil/faqs/docket.shtml
Litigated documents are generally a good example of what not to do, but are a poor example of best practices. That is generally how budding lawyers are trained in law school, and consequently the reason most legal documents are unnecessarily complex.
We think about this stuff a lot, of course. There's no doubt that the "perfect document" is really hard to find, and some documents are way too complicated to be executed without a lawyer. Nevertheless, as some reader said, sometimes you just want to see how a contract looks like, what other people do. For example, few people will sign a termsheet without a lawyer, but they could benefit from seeing the different standards and use Docracy's comparison feature to spot the differences, and distinguish the boilerplates from the juicy clauses. In other words, learn, and understand better what they end up signing, and what their lawyer says. We use the blog and other initiatives (we're organizing a series of free legal workshops here in NY, taught by startup lawyers to entrepreneurs) to inform and educate users, so they can tell when it's time to DIY, and when it's time to go to an attorney.
Interesting. For those reasons, it could be valuable as well.
However, I think your statement indicates I didn't quite communicate my point clearly enough.
>>There's no doubt that the "perfect document" is really hard to find...<<
In most areas, there is no such thing as a perfect document. Trying to find one is a fool's errand. A document is only perfect in that it protects as many rights as possible for a particular client. Because different clients have different needs, wants, and rights, no document is going to be universally "perfect".
Again, this is not to say that your idea isn't great, and doesn't have the potential to provide a lot of value. I think it is/does.
However, I think your statement indicates I didn't quite communicate my point clearly enough.
>>There's no doubt that the "perfect document" is really hard to find...<<
In most areas, there is no such thing as a perfect document. Trying to find one is a fool's errand. A document is only perfect in that it protects as many rights as possible for a particular client. Because different clients have different needs, wants, and rights, no document is going to be universally "perfect".
Again, this is not to say that your idea isn't great, and doesn't have the potential to provide a lot of value. I think it is/does.
> There's a reason attorneys are the only profession that get paid to research the very subject they're supposed to be experts in.
Isn't this true for any research professor/scientist, regardless of field? Why do you consider it to be unique to lawyers?
Isn't this true for any research professor/scientist, regardless of field? Why do you consider it to be unique to lawyers?
In a way, yes, though I would argue that implicit in "scientist" or "research professor" is the idea that they are searching for unknowns. The professional world is thought of very differently.
If you went into an architect's office and he told you he'd need $4000 to research whether gravity applies to the building you want him to build, you'd scoff. If you went to an accountant to ask whether you can take a certain deduction and he said he needed $4000 to look it up, you'd think he was either incompetent or a fraudster. But this is accepted (and necessary) in the legal world.
If you went into an architect's office and he told you he'd need $4000 to research whether gravity applies to the building you want him to build, you'd scoff. If you went to an accountant to ask whether you can take a certain deduction and he said he needed $4000 to look it up, you'd think he was either incompetent or a fraudster. But this is accepted (and necessary) in the legal world.
ahh, i see your point, now. thanks. what do you think about adding engineers (for certain values of engineer) to the list of professions that get paid to do research?
Let me put this a slightly different way: Many professions are paid to do research, some engineers included, but I think lawyers are the only ones who are paid to do so by the consumer.
I would analogize it to individual cancer patient going to a research scientist at Bristol-Myers Squibb and saying "Hey, what would happen if you tweaked XYZ molecule? Would that cure me?"
The engineers that are paid directly by the consumer, I would think, are much closer to data crunchers than true researchers. Maybe some architects or other types with engineering experience could jump in and disagree?
I would analogize it to individual cancer patient going to a research scientist at Bristol-Myers Squibb and saying "Hey, what would happen if you tweaked XYZ molecule? Would that cure me?"
The engineers that are paid directly by the consumer, I would think, are much closer to data crunchers than true researchers. Maybe some architects or other types with engineering experience could jump in and disagree?
Couldn't this help lawyers as well? Basically like a simple standard library of documents.
Yes, most definitely. There are companies that do nothing but produce form documents (for a hefty fee) that could be eliminated.
But again, the caveat is that, depending on the circumstances, a good lawyer might need to significantly modify even his own well crafted standard document to protect his client. The benefit of a good lawyer is knowing when things need to be modified.
But again, the caveat is that, depending on the circumstances, a good lawyer might need to significantly modify even his own well crafted standard document to protect his client. The benefit of a good lawyer is knowing when things need to be modified.
From clicking around, docracy allows you to make branches of the document, and also see what changes have been done. So I think it's meant to be a tool to bring version control available to software developers to finally be available to lawyers, organized in a way that's easy to organize and browse for the lawyer's clients.
Think of it as a boilerplate repository. I wouldn't be surprised if half of all initial legal maneuvers could be handled by a wizard in software. Yes, I know: "which half?"
I'm in charge of content here at Docracy and here are answers to some of the initial questions:
1) All content is user generated, and we just started so please be patient if something is missing! We hope to get a solid library of US document to start, and then hopefully spread enough to cover also different jurisdictions/regions.
2) As pents90 said, rating system is pretty tricky for legal content, but we do track signatures and data to help people identify the most used documents. There's a discussion page for every document, where you can share questions and opinions, tell us if you need a specific version, etc
3) We'll co-host a legal hackathon next month, where people will use Docracy to branch the current draft of SOPA and PIPA and make it better. More info: http://legalhackathon.blipclinic.org/
Last but not least, here is some stuff useful to startups/hackers: http://www.docracy.com/75/employment-offer-letter http://www.docracy.com/103/founder-collaboration-agreement http://www.docracy.com/35/founders-equity-agreement http://www.docracy.com/263/founder-advisor-standard-template http://www.docracy.com/367/consulting-agreement-for-hourly-w... http://www.docracy.com/2817/standard-agreement-for-design-se...
Of course, any feedback is welcome!
Last but not least, here is some stuff useful to startups/hackers: http://www.docracy.com/75/employment-offer-letter http://www.docracy.com/103/founder-collaboration-agreement http://www.docracy.com/35/founders-equity-agreement http://www.docracy.com/263/founder-advisor-standard-template http://www.docracy.com/367/consulting-agreement-for-hourly-w... http://www.docracy.com/2817/standard-agreement-for-design-se...
Of course, any feedback is welcome!
Not to bug you with feature requests, but I think it would also be helpful to know which editors/users are verified attorneys - but I understand the complications and overhead involved with implementing that.
That said, terrific job. I could see myself being a paying customer (assuming you go that route). I think I'd just need some usage stats or perhaps testimonials from trusted parties to actually use a document.
That said, terrific job. I could see myself being a paying customer (assuming you go that route). I think I'd just need some usage stats or perhaps testimonials from trusted parties to actually use a document.
I'd think most attorneys (or whomever) wanting to participate in a site like this might want to upload something such as a photo of their JD. There could be some way to offload the work of the site owners and give at least some credibility.
Anyhow, this site looks pretty awesome and I am going to check it out. As someone hyper-bootstrapping his first startup (poor), a halfassed privacy policy or something may be better than nothing anyhow. Maybe I can get some idea what I will be looking at before I take the dive and hire a real lawyer too.
Anyhow, this site looks pretty awesome and I am going to check it out. As someone hyper-bootstrapping his first startup (poor), a halfassed privacy policy or something may be better than nothing anyhow. Maybe I can get some idea what I will be looking at before I take the dive and hire a real lawyer too.
Yes, we are planning a verification system for lawyers' profiles, although you can already tell a lot by looking at their profile information (website, twitter, etc)
Thanks, I see these now. I should have looked around more before commenting and I bookmarked it!
Still need verification as a practicing lawyer who is licensed is sometimes different from just getting a JD..
It could be used as a selling point in letting those who get verified add to it telling what specialties they handle, etc.
It could be used as a selling point in letting those who get verified add to it telling what specialties they handle, etc.
Almost all states' bar associations have public profiles indicating the license statuses of their lawyers.
California, for example, requires a public email address -- verification can be accomplished by sending a Docracy verification email to the bar-published email address.
California, for example, requires a public email address -- verification can be accomplished by sending a Docracy verification email to the bar-published email address.
Having a JD doesn't make someone a licensed attorney, and I'd seriously question the competence of any attorney willing to participate in a site like this, as doing so would be insurmountably fraught with professional responsibility and legal ethics issues. This is not legal advice.
You nailed it: it's not legal advice, but you might need legal advice from those lawyers, and it's definitely helpful if Docracy helps you contact them. I don't see anything unethical in this, also considering that the service is free for all users, lawyers included.
We actually have pretty reputable contributors, like Gunderson Dettmer LLP. Lawyers who realize that lawyering skills lay beyond standard templates are also generally better (or at least more human) than those who charge you $500 for a template they've been using for years.
We actually have pretty reputable contributors, like Gunderson Dettmer LLP. Lawyers who realize that lawyering skills lay beyond standard templates are also generally better (or at least more human) than those who charge you $500 for a template they've been using for years.
Where should the content on this kind of site come from, if not from attorneys? "Contract law hobbyists"?
It would be great to also add a short human-readable (i.e. non-legalize) version of each document. Something along the lines of what Creative Commons folks do with their licenses (e.g. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
A really interesting concept! Unfortunately it's only really applicable for Americans though. It'd be nice if there was support for other legal systems, but I guess that'll come with time.
Ask the Samwer brothers. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3656156
[deleted]
Love it!
As a lawyer (UK based if you're thinking of expansion!), I think it's a great idea. I've been mulling over something similar for in-house teams but based on precedent clauses rather than entire documents.
As a lawyer (UK based if you're thinking of expansion!), I think it's a great idea. I've been mulling over something similar for in-house teams but based on precedent clauses rather than entire documents.
I would love to see a site that let you piece together a contract by choosing certain clauses to get the contract you want. Even in a simple subcontractor agreement you have to make decisions like a) what kind of non-compete do you want? b) who owns the copyright to the work, etc.
This is a great idea too. One of the UK providers does a good job of this using technology they call FastDraft. Plugs in to Companies House to get company data for the parties to the agreement; allows you to specify how you want non-competes to work etc. For individuals or small companies it is cost-prohibitive though. A small legal team (3 or 4 people) can pay around £10k a year.
Generally, I think the legal market is ripe for disruption and can be demystified through applications like Docracy.
Generally, I think the legal market is ripe for disruption and can be demystified through applications like Docracy.
This is fantastic. As a student looking to start a company after graduation, I've wondered a lot about the legal issues surrounding equity, incorporation, and founders agreements. I feel that with this site, I can read sample documents so that, when I do need to talk to a lawyer, I will be much more informed.
Absolutely fantastic. Anticipating the questions I'll get asked, what's the best way to do due diligence against these? The discussion is a great first step, but is there a way to file explicit "bugs" against a document, or show verified legal support for a document's worth?
I just signed up with docracy, but as soon as I signed up and visited the next page- Test Signing Document (Non-Binding)
There is some spanish/french content, which I think is from the web design template that you used. You should think of removing it.
'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, noster periculis dissentiunt eam in, cu vivendo splendide sea, vidisse phaedrum mel ea. Vis ne paulo corpora suavitate, salutandi theophrastus vel ei, facilisi mediocrem deterruisset cum ex. Mandamus expetenda vis ad, cu dicit offendit constituto cum. Ad eos wisi pericula assueverit, in eum soleat insolens convenire. Has oratio aperiri aliquam ei, mei ex nostrud comprehensam. Summo quando eos ut, mundi maiorum cu sed.'
There is some spanish/french content, which I think is from the web design template that you used. You should think of removing it.
'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, noster periculis dissentiunt eam in, cu vivendo splendide sea, vidisse phaedrum mel ea. Vis ne paulo corpora suavitate, salutandi theophrastus vel ei, facilisi mediocrem deterruisset cum ex. Mandamus expetenda vis ad, cu dicit offendit constituto cum. Ad eos wisi pericula assueverit, in eum soleat insolens convenire. Has oratio aperiri aliquam ei, mei ex nostrud comprehensam. Summo quando eos ut, mundi maiorum cu sed.'
That's placeholder text.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorem_ipsum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorem_ipsum
This is Latin, not Spanish/French. I'm surprised an HNer wouldn't know that.
Great implementation of an idead that I guess often crossed the mind of many.
One feature request, please make it regional. It would be very nice if every document would have a geographical area and language attribute.
One feature request, please make it regional. It would be very nice if every document would have a geographical area and language attribute.
Now a semantic analysis of the text would be great.
A legal document is just a combination of generic words for specific circumstances.
Maybe law language is just a programming language in some way and we need coffescript for that.
A legal document is just a combination of generic words for specific circumstances.
Maybe law language is just a programming language in some way and we need coffescript for that.
Such things exist -- they are called legal treatises.
For laymen, the equivalent would be books like the Nolo series.
For laymen, the equivalent would be books like the Nolo series.
Gorgeous website. What need or frustration fuelled the creation of it?
Hi there, I'm a Docracy founder. The frustration that fueled the creation of the site was us trying to sign an NDA in my previous startup. None of the parties involved really knew what NDA would be a good one to sign, we both just wanted that part of the relationship protected but over with as quickly as possible. We were surprised to find that there wasn't a repository of accepted standards for some of these things, so ultimately we decided to take a shot at making it ourselves.
When the site works best is when a document becomes a standard (for example, a NYC startup NDA) and you sign it on the site. Then you know it hasn't been tampered with by the counterparty and you can execute it quickly and confidently.
When the site works best is when a document becomes a standard (for example, a NYC startup NDA) and you sign it on the site. Then you know it hasn't been tampered with by the counterparty and you can execute it quickly and confidently.
Cool site! It's like github for legal documents. Perfect.
Now if there was a way to encourage democratic gov'ts to draft their bills using something similar...
Now if there was a way to encourage democratic gov'ts to draft their bills using something similar...
Absolutely love this idea!
Love it. Will a rating system be added? Would love to know which documents are better than others in a particular category.
I'm a Docracy founder:
We may consider a rating system. Right now, we're keeping track (anonymously) of usage metrics, especially how often each document is executed (signed) via the site. Each execution is evidence that both the party and the counter-party found the terms to be sensible and fair, so we think this is a strong metric of quality for the document.
We may consider a rating system. Right now, we're keeping track (anonymously) of usage metrics, especially how often each document is executed (signed) via the site. Each execution is evidence that both the party and the counter-party found the terms to be sensible and fair, so we think this is a strong metric of quality for the document.
[deleted]
Yay! It's about time someone did this.
Bookmarked! Looks like it will definitely help startups get some general direction in regards to legal docs.
great website and the idea - I was looking for content like that when starting my first company
> Download PDF / Download Word
Providing a non-proprietary format such as ODF wouldn't hurt.
Providing a non-proprietary format such as ODF wouldn't hurt.
I like the spirit of this and LegalZoom. I never understood how come we couldn't just fill out and submit a web form to create most kinds of businesses, assuming generic enough details. I understand there are complex edge cases and situations but there are ways of making them a non-issue if we have the collective willpower and make the right base premises.
The forms themselves are easy, even trivial to fill out. However, the Secretaries of State generally do not have the resources to fully modernize their filing systems to handle web-based submissions.
Also, in many cases (i.e., California), the SOS's are barred by statute from accepting non-physical business filings for new entities.
Also, in many cases (i.e., California), the SOS's are barred by statute from accepting non-physical business filings for new entities.
interesting. thanks for insight. so both of those still fallback to a case of lacking willpower and political inertia
this area feels like one of those cases where if we could start with a blank slate, from scratch, and design it "right, from the start", this problem would go away. actually a lot of government and banking feels that way. much of it is an echo/zombie from an era without computers, without the Internet, without telecomm, etc. they just shamble on and very slowly and incrementally incorporate the state-of-the-art, usually only in little pockets and niches.
this area feels like one of those cases where if we could start with a blank slate, from scratch, and design it "right, from the start", this problem would go away. actually a lot of government and banking feels that way. much of it is an echo/zombie from an era without computers, without the Internet, without telecomm, etc. they just shamble on and very slowly and incrementally incorporate the state-of-the-art, usually only in little pockets and niches.
Even if those documents are flawless and cover exactly what someone needs (incredibly unlikely), in many areas the documents themselves aren't necessarily the problem: it's knowing what documents, in combination, you need.
For example, if I want to make a real estate secured loan to someone, what do I need? If you're fairly sophisticated, you might say a Note and a Deed of Trust. Great, but what if that someone is a business or a single asset entity? Should you make the loan? Should you get a guaranty from the principals? Would that guaranty even be enforceable? In many cases, just having access to the documents really isn't enough. There's a reason attorneys are the only profession that get paid to research the very subject they're supposed to be experts in. This stuff is complicated.
I like the idea though, and if you could fill some of those knowledge gaps, this could be really valuable.