A better model, and forty contracts to check
Your team wants to use a new model provider for one feature, because it handles long documents better. Engineering could switch next week. Then someone remembers that most of your law firm contracts include a list of sub-processors and a promise to give notice before adding one. Some firms negotiated longer notice periods. A few have the right to object. One large firm's contract says no new AI providers without written approval.
Nobody knows exactly which firm signed which version. The contracts are PDFs in a shared drive. The switch waits while someone reads them all, and the product falls behind.
Why sub-processor changes are harder for legal tech
Law firms scrutinise suppliers because they hold client confidential information, and their own clients ask them about the suppliers they use. Sub-processor lists and notice periods are a standard part of how they manage that. For a legal tech startup built on cloud services and AI providers, the list changes more often than traditional software.
- Contracts were negotiated firm by firm, with different notice periods and rights.
- The sub-processor list in contracts is typed by hand and drifts from the services actually in use.
- Engineers add services, such as an error tracker or a new model provider, without anyone checking contracts.
- Notices are sent by email from whoever remembers, with no record of who received them.
- Firms that object cannot be kept on the old setup because the product has no per-firm switch.
What getting it wrong costs
A change made without proper notice can be a breach of your agreement with a firm, and a firm that finds out from its own audit will lose trust in you quickly. Being too cautious costs too: your product stays on older providers, features lag behind competitors, and engineers wait on legal reviews that take weeks because nobody has the facts to hand.
How we build sub-processor changes you can manage
What we build ties your sub-processor list to your real system and your contracts, so changes are planned rather than feared.
- A sub-processor register generated from your infrastructure and code: every external service that processes firm data, what data it sees, and where it runs.
- A check in your release process that flags any new external service touching firm data, so nothing is added quietly.
- Contract terms captured per firm: notice period, objection rights, approval requirements and the approved list at signing, entered once from each contract.
- A change workflow: propose a new sub-processor, see which firms need notice and by when, send notices from a template, and record delivery and responses.
- Per-firm provider routing, so a firm that objects or has not yet approved stays on its approved providers while others move.
- A customer-facing page or trust centre showing the current list and upcoming changes, for firms that prefer to check themselves.
| Firm contract term | What the workflow does |
|---|---|
| Standard notice period | Notice sent, change goes live after the period |
| Longer negotiated notice | Firm stays on current provider until its date |
| Right to object | Objection recorded, firm kept on current provider |
| Written approval needed | Approval requested, no change until received |
| No specific terms | Notice sent for good practice, recorded |
What your contracts require is for you and your lawyers. We make sure the system matches what they say and that every step is recorded.
Adding the new model provider
Engineering proposes the new provider. The register shows which data it would see. The workflow lists firms by notice period: most on the standard period, three with longer periods, one needing written approval. Notices go out the same day from the template, each recorded. On the go-live date, the feature switches to the new provider for firms whose notice has run, while the others stay on the old one until their dates, and the firm needing approval stays put until it gives it.
Checklist: sub-processor changes
- Nobody can say which firms have which notice terms without reading contracts.
- Your contractual sub-processor list may not match the services you use.
- New external services can be added without a contract check.
- Notices are sent by email with no record of delivery.
- You cannot keep one firm on an old provider while moving others.