\u201cWe believe that generative Al is not just a tool, but a transformative force that will empower our lawyers to deliver deeper insights, faster results, and even greater value to our clients,\u201d says Zia Mody, co-founder and managing partner of AZB.<\/p>\n
Harvey is also working with enterprise companies in India. \u201cIn India, the possibility for both in-house work and firm transformation is notably high,\u201d Weinberg tells India Business Law Journal.<\/p>\n
A recent IBLJ report showed paralegal roles under pressure from automation, but Weinberg frames it differently: \u201cWe generally believe that AI won\u2019t replace lawyers; it will replace lawyers who don\u2019t adopt technology as part of the broader transformation of law.\u201d<\/p>\n
He says that Harvey AI is supporting reskilling through its law school alliance programme in the US, partnering with prestigious institutions such as Stanford Law School, NYU School of Law, the University of Michigan Law School, UCLA School of Law, the University of Texas School of Law and Notre Dame Law School as collaborators, after beginning \u201ca rigorous pilot of Harvey\u2019s platform a year ago\u201d.<\/p>\n
Lawyers in the US, Canada and some Caribbean courts are now required to disclose the use of generative AI tools in preparing court documents. US federal courts, such as those in Texas, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and the Court of International Trade, mandate disclosure and certification that AI-generated content has been verified for accuracy.<\/p>\n
Canadian courts, including Manitoba\u2019s Court of King\u2019s Bench and the Supreme Court of Yukon, have similar disclosure requirements. Courts emphasise that AI cannot be used to generate affidavits, witness statements or evidence, and lawyers remain fully responsible for their submissions. Failure to disclose or verify AI-assisted documents may lead to penalties, rejection of filings, or disciplinary action.<\/p>\n
Deloitte recently had to partially refund the Australian government after delivering a AUD440,000 (USD289,000) report that contained multiple errors attributed to the use of generative AI. The report, commissioned by the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations to review the targeted compliance framework and related IT systems in the welfare programme, included fake academic citations and a fabricated quote from a federal court judgment. After academics flagged these errors, Deloitte acknowledged using a generative AI model in early drafts.<\/p>\n
In India, while mandatory disclosures are not yet widespread, a growing trend influenced by US court practices is evident, and the Supreme Court of India has been cautiously exploring AI applications in legal processes.<\/p>\n
Weinberg remains optimistic that more players in India\u2019s legal sector will see AI-assisted operations as an opportunity. He wants law firms and general counsel to move from being customers to building custom workflows with Harvey, \u201cto integrations and partnerships that help drive transformation\u201d in the Indian legal services market. \u201cI hope what GCs and managing partners read into our expansion plan is that Harvey plans to build a significant engineering team in India, and that as a result there are countless opportunities for how they can engage with our team,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
Bengaluru also offers the chance to establish a strong tech back office. \u201cWe are starting [in Bengaluru] with a focus on engineering, product and design talent led by Siva Gurumurthy, our CTO,\u201d says Weinberg. \u201cSiva has built teams in India and was a key driver in our decision to build a team there now.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re hiring the best possible engineering talent to focus on the most important AI product challenges that will help our customers, so I anticipate their work will help us accelerate growth in India, but also well beyond India, which I hope is one of the many reasons people choose to work for us.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Winston-with-Gabe.jpg\"\/)
Winston Weinberg, left, with co-founder Gabe Pereyra
\n Changing compliance norms<\/p>\n
Harvey\u2019s entry into Indian legaltech comes at a time of great transition. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act), has been passed but is not yet fully in force, and norms for how foreign firms must manage India-resident data processing remain unclear. Weinberg is well aware of the implications.<\/p>\n
\u201cOur in-house Privacy and AI Legal team closely monitors new developments and enforcement timelines, while working with leading local counsel to ensure we are ready to implement any additional requirements the government may introduce, including data transfer mechanisms,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
For data localisation, Harvey already offers customers to store their data exclusively on Microsoft Azure servers in the central India region. According to Weinberg, customers act as the data fiduciaries and can specify storage preferences in their order form, ensuring data remains within India.<\/p>\n
Under the current interpretations of the DPDP Act, a data fiduciary is an entity or person who decides the purpose and means of processing personal data. Harvey AI functions as the data processor, handling personal data on behalf of the fiduciary.<\/p>\n
In the Indian context, we are making commercially reasonable efforts this year to incorporate local primary-law sources such as SCC Online, Manupatra, etc., into the platform. These integrations will ensure that users have access to authoritative material directly within Harvey<\/p>\n
\u201cTo safeguard personal data, Harvey maintains a layered security program aligned with international standards,\u201d says Weinberg.<\/p>\n
\u201cOur Security Addendum details these controls, which include encryption in transit and at rest, logically isolated customer environments, strict identity and access management, continuous vulnerability monitoring, and independent third-party penetration testing.\u201d<\/p>\n
AI, research and quality<\/p>\n
Along with data processing comes the crucial issue of data input. Generative AI products rely heavily on broad contextualisation of information, whether provided directly by users or sourced freely online.<\/p>\n
According to a Thomson Reuters Westlaw study on cases between 30 June and 1 August 2025, hallucinations and citations of non-existent legal cases remain pervasive across courts.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis search found 22 different cases in which courts or opposing parties found non-existent cases within filings, leading to discipline motions or sanctions in many instances,\u201d writes Zach Warren, a manager for enterprise content for technology and innovation at the Thomson Reuters Institute.<\/p>\n
Whether integrating with local primary-law sources or drawing on customer-provided corpora alongside their LexisNexis alliance, the responsibility for demonstrating citation reliability in Indian courts and tribunals lies with Harvey AI.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn the Indian context, we are making commercially reasonable efforts this year to incorporate local primary-law sources such as SCC Online, Manupatra, etc., into the platform,\u201d says Weinberg. \u201cThese integrations will ensure that users have access to authoritative material directly within Harvey.\u201d<\/p>\n
Unique challenges<\/p>\n
The pace and character of legaltech and AI adoption in India are distinct from the West, and in many ways \u201cuniquely promising\u201d, says Weinberg.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn Western markets, adoption is shaped by mature infrastructures, structured procurement processes, and incremental efficiency gains,\u201d he says. \u201cIn India, adoption follows a more dynamic and leap-frogging trajectory.\u201d<\/p>\n
He sees three factors that are driving India\u2019s outlook:<\/p>\n
Client demand is shifting. Customers now expect firms to use AI for efficiency, reversing earlier restrictions;
\nCustomisation matters. Beyond generic tools, firms want tailored workflows built for their needs; and
\nPartner-level adoption is rising. AI use is no longer left to junior associates; senior partners are driving adoption.<\/p>\n
In India, both firms and in-house teams are open to experimenting with AI not only to refine workflows, but to rethink them entirely.<\/p>\n
Lawyers look for practical, immediate value, favouring tools that improve turnaround time, research quality and client service. Local expertise is critical; solutions must reflect Indian courts, drafting styles and regulatory frameworks, notes Weinberg.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhat excites me most about India is the openness to new ways of working; young lawyers and forward-looking firms are eager to experiment with AI to differentiate themselves in a competitive market,\u201d he says. \u201cThis means innovation in India isn\u2019t just about keeping pace \u2013 it\u2019s about reimagining the practice of law with AI at its core.\u201d<\/p>\n
Putting Harvey to work<\/p>\n
As Harvey sets its sights on India, CTO Siva Gurumurthy shares his perspective on the company\u2019s engineering strategy, data safeguards, lawyer training, and the wider impact of AI on legal practice<\/p>\n
Q: What challenges come with localising Harvey for Indian legal workflows? And will the Bengaluru team handle language quality assurance, document management system patterns, or India-specific features?<\/p>\n
![\"Siva](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Siva-Gurumurthy-191x300.jpg\"\/)
Siva Gurumurthy<\/p>\n
Siva Gurumurthy: The Bengaluru team will certainly work on projects that help Harvey grow in India, but I think it\u2019s important to note that they will work generally on critical projects for Harvey that help our customers globally.<\/p>\n
So, I think for really strong engineering talent, working at Harvey gives you the opportunity to solve hard and interesting technical problems for customers at a global scale from India, which is part of the reason we are really looking forward to hiring there.<\/p>\n
Q: How do you balance client corpora with proprietary datasets and alliances like LexisNexis? What safeguards ensure accuracy and bias mitigation for India?<\/p>\n
Gurumurthy: A key feature of Harvey is its ability to leverage a wide range of public and proprietary legal data sources. This data is used as context for model responses, but importantly is never given access to client-provided data that is stored on the platform.<\/p>\n
With Lexis specifically, Harvey is able to search Lexis case law (and other data), and use it to generate a response to a user\u2019s query, but this interaction is one-directional (Harvey reading data from Lexis); at no point does Lexis gain visibility or access to client data stored in Harvey.<\/p>\n
As we expand our data sources (which happens weekly), we will follow a similar approach with other data partners. With regard to model accuracy, we share regular updates on model accuracy specific to the legal field. Over time, it\u2019s possible we consider more regional analysis globally, so that\u2019s a good item for us to get feedback from customers in India on.<\/p>\n
Q: What skills should Indian lawyers build to stay relevant in an AI-augmented environment? How can firms and universities help?<\/p>\n
Gurumurthy: I think it\u2019s less technical skills per se and more developing AI fluency. For example, we see major changes in results when lawyers get good at prompting, so even just getting comfortable with prompts is a great way for lawyers to increase their comfort level with AI products.<\/p>\n
At universities, we have just announced a programme in partnership with law schools that will help address this specific issue over time. We announced the first batch of schools in the US, but over time, the plan would be to bring this type of content to any institutions teaching law, so that AI becomes part of what people learn alongside traditional elements of law.<\/p>\n
Q: How will AI affect junior associates and paralegals in India? Will Harvey substitute or augment their work?<\/p>\n
Gurumurthy: We have seen countless examples of customers whose use of Harvey meaningfully augments the work of lawyers and legal teams more broadly, saving them hours of time every week. We think of AI as improving the daily work of lawyers by making their jobs more efficient and effective.<\/p>\n
Q: What cybersecurity protocols protect sensitive legal data in Harvey? How do you address confidentiality and regulatory concerns?<\/p>\n
Gurumurthy: As you might imagine, for law firms, these concerns are paramount, so Harvey spends a significant amount of time and energy thinking through these challenges and providing context on them to our customers. To briefly summarise, as best I can, I think it comes down to three things:<\/p>\n
(1) Model usage. It adheres to a strict policy of no training, no retention, and no human review;<\/p>\n
(2) Complete segregation. All customer data is stored in a dedicated, logically separated storage account with its own unique encryption key. Data is encrypted at rest using AES-256 and in transit using TLS 1.3 (cryptographic methods to protect data); and<\/p>\n
(3) Full customer control. Customers control where their data is stored and processed and can set their own data retention policies, including a zero-day retention option where queries and responses are not stored after processing.<\/p>\n
On regulatory evolution, we work closely with our head of privacy to ensure we regularly update our policies in each of the markets we operate in, so compliance is always top of mind for our team.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"With legal AI firm Harvey setting up shop in Bengaluru, we speak with CEO and co-founder Winston Weinberg…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":90804,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[345,343,344,61372,1313,25880,61373,2495,61374,85,10058,46,21074,55286,61375,125],"class_list":{"0":"post-90803","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-artificial-intelligence","8":"tag-ai","9":"tag-artificial-intelligence","10":"tag-artificialintelligence","11":"tag-bengaluru-expansion","12":"tag-compliance","13":"tag-data-protection","14":"tag-digital-personal-data-protection-act-2023","15":"tag-generative-ai","16":"tag-harvey-ai","17":"tag-il","18":"tag-india-market","19":"tag-israel","20":"tag-law-firms","21":"tag-legal-services","22":"tag-legaltech","23":"tag-technology"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90803","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=90803"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/90803\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/90804"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=90803"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=90803"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/il\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=90803"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}