AI Lawyer

AI Lawyer is split across four working surfaces. AI Research answers a typed legal question by combining the model's knowledge with a live web search. Chats hold longer conversations, grouped into folders per case, where files uploaded to a folder become context for every new chat inside it. The Docs page carries the fixed-purpose tools: Agreement Summary, Compare Agreements, Create Agreement Light and Create Agreement PRO, plus translation and image-to-text conversion. Storage keeps the files, and can mount Google Drive, OneDrive, SharePoint, Dropbox, Box or Notion instead of local uploads.

Everything is driven one request at a time. The research page describes the loop as typing a question and receiving an answer, and the internet lookup is a per-question toggle that switches itself off again. There is no docket, no deadline tracking and no filing: the free-standing calculators for alimony, child support, eviction timelines and statutes of limitation are the closest the site comes to case mechanics.

There is no /pricing route; the URL returns 404 and the sitemap lists no pricing or plans page among its 1,868 entries. The rate card instead appears inside the vendor's own market write-up, which states that AI Lawyer "is the AI-native option for the documents-and-answers layer at $55 a week, $159 a month or $759 a year, with half-price promotions running regularly".

The three terms buy the same product. The quick start guide says the weekly, monthly and yearly premium plans "all have the same functionality, the only difference is in the time range", so the only pricing decision is commitment length. Students and teachers get half off by choosing that option under Activate Pro, with proof of status possibly requested later. Storage is the one metered element: capacity is raised through a "Get More Storage" upgrade whose price is not published. Firms do not buy from the site at all, since a business workspace is switched on with the sales team.

The homepage calls to action read Try for Free, and the site FAQ says "We provide a free trial for everyone" without quantifying it. The docs do quantify it: "Enjoy 5 free queries or a 24-hour free trial after registration." That is a sampler rather than a free tier, and it is the single most useful number on the site for a buyer deciding whether to put a card in.

What stays free indefinitely sits outside the app: a large library of document templates with download counts on each, and the legal calculators. Both are reachable without an account.

The privacy policy names the two processors that do the generating, OpenAI, L.L.C. and Mistral AI SAS, and sets out the terms: they receive the request content and minimal technical metadata, not your name, email, payment information or account identifiers; they do not use the content to train their general-purpose models; and retention is "zero retention or up to 30 days for abuse monitoring, after which the content is deleted". A list of current providers is also offered on request.

On the vendor's own side, the quick start guide states that "This storage does not train our AI". Deletion is in the user's hands: chat deletion is permanent and automatic deletion can be set with customizable time ranges. Two things are published nowhere. There is no SOC 2 or ISO 27001 report and no DPA offered to customers, and there is no stated hosting region or residency choice, which matters because the operator is an EU company handling legal documents.

Two consecutive FAQ answers close off programmatic use. On connecting AI Lawyer to your own site: "We are working on this feature." On an API: "We don’t have a public API yet, but contact us at ailawyerapp@gmail.com for custom integration requests." No MCP server, connector or webhook appears anywhere on the site, docs or legal pages. Integration, in the product's current shape, means mounting a cloud drive into Storage.

The one developer-facing artefact worth noting is that the site publishes API license and API terms-of-use templates for customers to draft with, which are template documents rather than the product's own interface.

The about page describes a two-year-old product built by a technical team with guidance from 70 legal experts, claims over 300,000 registered users in 60+ countries, and calls itself "a Polish\EU product". The App Store listing attributes the iOS app to the seller AI LAWTECH SP Z O O, a Polish limited company, which matches. The homepage carries NVIDIA Inception and Google for Startups badges and a Product Hunt product-of-the-day badge.

The user figures do not line up across surfaces: the about page says over 300,000 registered users while the App Store description says "Over 200,000 users trust AI Lawyer". The App Store page is also where the sharpest external signal sits, a 1.2 rating from a small number of ratings, with reviews alleging billing continued after an attempted cancellation. That is one buyer's account rather than a documented defect, but it stands against the FAQ's own cancellation path of profile, My Subscription, Cancel Subscription, and a buyer should test that path during the trial.

It fits a consumer or a solo-to-small firm that needs plain-language answers, a summary of an agreement, a comparison of two drafts, or a first draft from a template, in any of many languages, on a phone as readily as a laptop. The folder-per-case chat structure and the cloud-drive mounting suit someone whose files already live in Google Drive or SharePoint.

It does not fit three buyers. Anyone who needs the product inside their own software is blocked by the absence of an API. Anyone procuring under a security review will find no audit report, no residency choice, no audit log and no uptime commitment, and the terms disclaim accuracy outright: the platform "is not a substitute for professional legal advice" and the vendor does "not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness" of the legal information it provides. And litigators should read the App Store reviews before buying, since the complaint there is that the assistant does not help build an argument.