Interview with Jeremy Bormann, Founder, Legal-Pythia
Hello Jeremy. You are a successful AI startup and reached out to Ambrosys. What was it about?
We had won an innovation competition held by the City of Munich. The challenge was to compare legal documents and identify synergies and conflicts. And we were looking for support from a company that already had solid experience in this area.
What were the challenges - from a technical perspective and from a founder's perspective?
From a founder's point of view, it meant satisfying customer needs in a short amount of time according to specifications, getting customers after all - simply, ensuring that the challenge was solved well. From a technical perspective, it meant being able to easily develop and train AI models so that they can understand, analyze and compare legal texts.
You proved yourselves against many other entrants. What gave you the competitive edge? Was it mainly technological, or did you simply have the right idea at the right time?
One thing is that we already had experience from projects with the Financial Supervisory Authority in the UK. Secondly, we make explainable AI and aim to be transparent in our use of AI. We want to explain to you or the users how a certain result is achieved. Last but not least, we were able to analyze documents in different languages and also data. We were very flexible and that set us apart from the competition.
How much technical know-how did you already have?
We had technical know-how, yes, but we just wanted the project to run as smoothly as possible. We got some allowance and thought about how best to spend it to get the project over the line as good and as quickly as possible. So why don't we just use a company that already has experience, that is also based in Germany, with whom we can build up a trusted relationship?
And what technical expertise could Ambrosys bring to the party?
Ambrosys already had experience in analyzing social media posts with AI, which was very similar to what we needed. That was the crunch point for success. We also researched and tested various models ourselves, but having a partner who is really good at it, who knows what they are doing and can also provide a different perspective, helped us a lot in the end.
Ambrosys says that one of their strong points is AI infrastructure, i.e. they create high-performance, scalable, secure software environments for AI development. Do you recognize this in your project?
Yes, definitely. Ambrosys provided us with the structures so that we could develop an AI model for the city of Munich. The project also went through some changes in the meantime, which is why there was a bit of a struggle. But we had this development landscape that gave the process structure, for which I am very grateful. It allowed us to further develop our models in a safe space. This is particularly important in Germany and Europe because of the GDPR. I also had the impression that more is to come from Ambrosys in this area, to really cover everything.
And in the future? As a founder, you have to ponder: do you want to build up expertise and technological assets within the company or do you continue to work with external partners?
We also want to have certain skills in-house. But we have a lot of projects. We do a lot in Ghana, a lot in the USA, we also do something with a company in the UK. As long as we have so many extra projects and don't have the power ourselves, I'd definitely call Ambrosys and say hey, what's the situation, don't we want to continue working together? Do things together. Partnerships take you further.
That's a nice sentence.
It's just my opinion. Just like in real life, you can simply achieve more. The big tech companies also work together. I think you can acquire better customers and solve problems better. You complement each other better than having to do everything in-house. It also helps you grow as an entrepreneur.
And how did the mutual getting to know each other go? What happens when a commercial law expert meets a physicist?
We are different characters, we sometimes had different views. They were complementary, so that can also be very good. We had a common goal. So we had an initial meeting to see if there was a fit. It was a good fit, we sorted out the requirements and set a roadmap. Then we got started, it went back and forth quickly and then turned out really well.
You may also say critical things.
I don't think it's criticism when I say: there are simply different types of companies with different structures. We are a young company. We are dynamic, there is also more chaos. Ambrosys is a contrast; they have more experience and take things differently. That's why it's not a criticism. It's just different company cultures that have to complement each other.
Thank you, Jeremy. I wish you every success - Legal-Pythia is a very exciting endeavor, as you can see from the echo on the web. All the best!
Thank you! Take care.