The generative AI platform Perplexity and the American online legal service company LegalZoom entered into a strategic partnership on the 4th of this month (local time). This marks the first official collaboration between a legal service provider and an AI platform, creating the first model that integrates online search and actual legal consultation into a single flow.
With this agreement, Perplexity’s paid subscribers can directly access practical legal services provided by LegalZoom, such as document drafting, contract reviews, company establishment, and licensing, within the AI search flow. The structure allows AI to provide information on legal queries and, when necessary, connect directly to actionable solutions.
The two companies presented a joint strategy to provide “reliable legal advice at the moment of need.” LegalZoom has been a leading company offering online legal document services to consumers and small businesses in the U.S. Perplexity processes over 150 million queries weekly, expanding the generative AI search market.
The subscription-based AI service users of Perplexity Pro can enjoy exclusive discount benefits on LegalZoom services due to this partnership. For a monthly fee of $20, besides premium features like advanced models, API usage credits, and priority support, users can also access actual legal services. Comprehensive solutions for startups and small businesses, including company establishment, employment contracts, and accounting system integration, are also included.
However, this partnership is specifically designed for the U.S. market. LegalZoom’s legal services are tailored to the U.S. legal system, making direct application in Korea impossible. This reality leaves new challenges for the Korean legal market, as foreign cases cannot be directly introduced.
Generative AI is evolving from an information search tool to an executable one. In areas like law, where expertise and reliability are crucial, the combination of AI and actual services can fundamentally change traditional legal service delivery methods. The structure implementing ‘execution-centric information,’ which Google or Naver searches could not provide, is being realized on AI-based platforms.
A similar trend is detectable in Korea. Some law firms and startups are developing contract generation AI and legal document automation tools. Still, the integrated model from ‘AI search to legal execution’ is in its early stages. Legal service regulations, personal data protection issues, and the application of the attorney act also present intricate legal issues.
What is needed now is not just simple technology adoption. Concrete discussions are necessary on how to design ‘AI+legal service models’ suited for Korea’s legal system and regulatory environment. Institutional arrangements are also required to prevent conflicts between lawyer-centered service models and technology. Particularly, public institutions and private enterprises must cooperate to enhance accessibility for SMEs and general consumers.
The system where AI provides precise guidance when legal information is needed, leading to actual consultation or document work, shows that the future depicted in the LegalZoom-Perplexity example is not far off. Korean society faces this question as well. What’s needed now is preparation to find the answers.