Product and intended use
Define the configuration, people, information and tasks being assessed.
Solo versus Enterprise; gen AI optional
Public claim only
This profile covers the Clearbrief Word add-in and web services. Homepage: users choose classic or generative AI tools depending on the case, and control if and how generative AI is used. Solo is list-priced; Enterprise Unlimited is custom. Bring-your-own-storage is offered so documents can stay in the customer's cloud. Relativity, iManage and NetDocuments connectors should be reviewed if enabled.
Ask: Confirm our plan (Solo versus Enterprise), whether generative AI is on, whether BYO storage is in use, and whether a signed MSA replaces the website Terms.
US-hosted SaaS Word add-in
Public claim only
Microsoft Word add-in (Microsoft AppSource) plus web login. Terms: services controlled and operated from facilities in the United States; users consent to US processing. Privacy: Sites hosted on servers in the United States; litigation data stored with an unnamed third-party cloud provider. BYO storage is a homepage option.
Ask: Which US cloud region holds our documents, prompts and outputs by default, and what does BYO storage change?
Cite-check, timelines, summaries in Word
Public claim only
Homepage: hyperlinked fact citations in Word, fact-checking, table builder, timelines and summaries from large document sets, opponent-brief cite analysis, Bluebook/California style conversion. Generative AI is optional. Fastcase and LexisNexis are listed as integrations for authorities.
Ask: Which features (Analyze/Fact-Cite, timelines, summaries, generative drafting, Fastcase/Lexis) will be enabled, and which remain off?
US product; Australian primary law not described
Public claim only
Terms: materials are directed to US entities unless otherwise stated; Washington law and King County courts. Privacy expressly lists Australia among regions whose users transfer data to the US. Fastcase/Lexis integrations are named; no AustLII, Jade or Westlaw Australia connector was found.
Ask: Which Australian authorities (federal and state) can Clearbrief cite-check, and can we keep matter documents out of the US default store via BYO storage?
Data, controls and requirements
Compare the actual configuration with firm, client and jurisdiction requirements, supported by evidence.
Litigation documents in US cloud
Not confirmed
Clearbrief holds litigation documents. Privacy: Clearbrief may access that data to deliver and improve the Services, test features in development, and conduct audits. Homepage customers include US firms, Microsoft Legal, courts/agencies and the AAA. No per-client AI exclusion or Australian hosting was documented. BYO storage may reduce what leaves the customer's cloud.
Ask: Can we disable generative AI and US-hosted copies per matter, and what region/subprocessor description can we give clients?
Generative AI optional; provider unnamed on site
Not confirmed
Homepage: control over if and how generative AI is used; data never used to train large language models. The foundation-model provider and region were not named on the product, privacy or terms pages reviewed. Microsoft Word is the client; that does not identify the LLM.
Ask: Which model provider and region process generative features when we enable them, and is there a zero-retention addendum with that provider?
Unnamed cloud storage; no published list
Not confirmed
Privacy: litigation data is stored with a third-party cloud storage provider (unnamed) and Personal Information may be disclosed to agents for hosting, billing, marketing and support. No dated subprocessor schedule, countries or notice/objection right was published.
Ask: Provide the current subprocessor list (cloud, LLM, billing, support, DMS connectors) with countries and 30-day notice/objection.
No LLM training claimed; privacy allows 'improve the Services'
Not confirmed
Homepage (security section): customer data is never used for training large language models. Privacy policy (22 January 2021): Clearbrief may access litigation data to deliver and improve the Services and to test features in development. Terms s.13.5: Clearbrief may use User Provided Information in aggregate form to improve the way the Services work and to create new features. Those clauses are not the same as a no-training warranty.
Ask: Confirm in a signed DPA that documents, prompts, outputs and logs are not used to train Clearbrief or third-party models, including 'improve the Services' and feature testing.
Aggregate use to create new features
Public claim only
Terms s.13.5: after a user deletes content, Clearbrief may still archive it under standard policies and use it in aggregate to improve the Services and create new features. Privacy lists user-experience research and surveys among sharing purposes. In-product thumbs-up/down was not described.
Ask: Is any in-product feedback or aggregate archive used for model or feature development, and can Enterprise switch that off?
90-day retrieval; archive policy unpublished
Public claim only
Terms s.7.4: following cancellation or termination, a User has 90 days to retrieve Content. s.13.5 allows archiving after deletion under 'standard policies'. Privacy policy has no numbered live-matter schedule and was last updated 22 January 2021.
Ask: Provide a numbered retention schedule for documents, prompts, outputs, logs and backups while a matter is live and after the 90-day window.
User download on termination; archive carve-out
Public claim only
On termination, Clearbrief will provide the ability to download data previously input, on request. Administrators receive Content if the User cannot be reached. Archive-under-standard-policies survives deletion. No deletion certificate or cloud-provider purge period is stated. Clearbrief may also terminate and delete Information for any reason with or without notice (s.6, s.12).
Ask: On exit, what is deleted from Clearbrief and its cloud provider within how many days, with what certificate, and does the archive carve-out apply to our matter files?
Staff access to litigation data for delivery and testing
Public claim only
Privacy: Clearbrief may access litigation data to deliver and improve the Services, test features in development, and conduct audits and troubleshooting. Terms s.7.7: Clearbrief may access, preserve and disclose account information if required by law or in good-faith belief it is needed for legal process, enforcement, third-party claims, customer service, or safety. Prior notice to the customer is not promised.
Ask: Is support access per-ticket with our approval, logged to us, and will you notify us of legal process seeking matter content?
Administrator-set privileges; SSO not documented
Public claim only
Terms: Administrator determines who can be a User and privilege levels; unique usernames must not be shared; password-protected areas. SSO/SAML, MFA enforcement and SCIM were not specified. BYO storage may change where files live but not how the Word add-in authenticates.
Ask: Do you support SAML/OIDC SSO-only, MFA enforcement and matter-level permissions for Enterprise?
Commercially reasonable measures; algorithms unnamed
Public claim only
Terms s.16: commercially reasonable technical and organisational measures against accidental loss and unauthorised access; no guarantee. Privacy: strict security measures, but internet transmission is not guaranteed secure. TLS/AES versions and CMK were not stated. SOC 2 Type 2 is claimed on the homepage.
Ask: Confirm TLS 1.2+ and AES-256 (or equivalent) in transit and at rest, including the unnamed cloud provider and BYO storage path, and whether CMK is available.
SOC 2 Type 2 claimed; report not published
Public claim only
Homepage security section: SOC 2 Type 2 certified with comprehensive data hygiene controls. The report, auditor, period and whether generative-AI processing is in scope were not published. A security-questions mailbox is offered.
Ask: Provide the current SOC 2 Type II report covering Clearbrief and any generative-AI subprocessors, including period and entities in scope.
Website Terms; Washington law; 12-month or USD 100 cap
Public claim only
Public Terms (Clearbrief, Inc., Seattle). Washington law; exclusive King County, Washington courts. Aggregate liability capped at fees paid in the prior 12 months or USD 100, whichever is greater. Consequential damages and loss of data excluded to the maximum extent permitted. Services AS IS; customer indemnifies Clearbrief. No public DPA. Privacy last updated 22 January 2021. A writing signed by both parties can modify the Terms.
Ask: Will Enterprise sign a DPA with APP flow-down, output ownership, a meaningful cap for confidentiality/data breach, and NSW or Australian law/forum?
US hosting; Australian users consent to US law
Public claim only
Privacy: if you access from Australia (or the EU/Asia), you transfer personal data to the United States and consent to US law. Terms s.19: consent to US transfer and processing; product directed to US entities unless otherwise stated. No SCCs, DPF certification or Australian region were found.
Ask: Name every country of storage and inference, including any LLM provider, and what APP 8 wording you provide for an Australian firm.
No public notification period
Not confirmed
Terms require the user to notify Clearbrief of account compromise. Clearbrief does not publish a numbered customer-notification period or NDB clause. Security questions go to hello@clearbrief.ai.
Ask: Within how many hours of discovering a suspected incident affecting our matter data will you notify us, and will you support an NDB assessment?
Terms changeable; material changes in 30 days
Public claim only
Terms may be changed at any time; continued use is acceptance; material changes effective 30 days after posting; sole remedy is to terminate. Privacy policy may be amended with or without notice. Fee changes: at least five days' notice.
Ask: Will Enterprise freeze terms during the term, and notify us before adding an LLM provider or changing the US hosting region?
90-day retrieval after termination
Public claim only
90 days to retrieve Content after cancellation or termination. User may download data previously input, on request. Archive-under-standard-policies may retain copies. No bulk-export format is specified. Auto-renew and non-refundable fees apply.
Ask: How do we export hyperlinked briefs, source links, timelines and audit logs on exit, and when are remaining copies deleted from Clearbrief and its cloud provider?
DMS, Clio, Relativity, research databases
Not confirmed
Listed connectors: Clio, iManage, NetDocuments, MyCase, Relativity, Fastcase, LexisNexis. Terms s.7.6: optional automatic retrieval from the customer's systems, with a disclaimer of liability. Each connector is a disclosure of matter content.
Ask: What scopes does each connector request, and how do we disable Relativity/DMS/research connectors without a ticket?
Research integrations; open web not described
Public claim only
Cite-checking is described via Fastcase and LexisNexis integrations, not as an open-web search. Terms allow the Services to call third-party sites solely at the user's direction. Whether generative features browse the open web was not stated.
Ask: Confirm generative features do not call the open web on our matters, and which Fastcase/Lexis collections are queried.
Word add-in writes into the brief
Not confirmed
The add-in inserts citations, hyperlinks, timelines and summaries into Word documents. Generative tools can generate text. No public description of an approval gate before insertion, or of agentic actions outside Word, was found.
Ask: Can we require named approval before Clearbrief inserts text or citations into a brief, and disable generative insertion firm-wide?
Hyperlinks for verification; Terms disclaim accuracy
Public claim only
The product is designed so claims are hyperlinked to sources for the lawyer to verify. Terms: no warranty of correctness, accuracy or reliability of results; AS IS. There is no clause requiring a qualified legal professional to approve outputs, but the drafting-in-Word design assumes the lawyer remains the filer.
Ask: Can we require named sign-off before a hyperlinked brief is exported, with a log of which citations were accepted?
