CaseMark vs Threadeo: how they compare in 2026
Court reporting firms are the buyers these two fight over most directly. Threadeo built its name on cloud video sync, aligning deposition video to certified transcripts, linking exhibits and producing the load files that TrialDirector, OnCue and other trial tools read. Its summaries for depositions, arbitrations and trials add contradictions, impeachment points and cross examination questions, each cited to page and line. CaseMark Source wraps a wider production job around the record. It certifies once into twelve transcript formats, drafts exhibit indexes for the reporter to approve and cuts captioned clips from a plain language request. Its branded portal lets a firm's clients order summaries and chronologies from a catalog of more than 880 workflows. Threadeo is sold per job and publishes a CloudReview Teams plan for law firms, while Source is quoted on the work product a firm produces. A reporting firm that mainly wants faster sync will find Threadeo focused on it, and one building a client facing service menu will find more in Source.
At a glance
All 15 axes, side by side
The same grid applied to every vendor in the index, graded from public sources. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.
AI Centrality
How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.
Deposition summaries come in analysis, index, page and line, and narrative formats, and CaseMark says a 200 page transcript comes back in under two minutes. Medical chronologies list each provider by date with diagnoses, ICD codes, medications and vitals. A firm can send examples of its own chronology format and get it back as a one click template. Workspace adds chat across a matter's files, Deep Research, custom agents, persistent memory across conversations and matters, and Overtime Mode, which keeps researching and drafting after the first prompt. Tabular Analysis turns hundreds of documents into one table with a CSV or Excel export. In Source, models draft exhibit indexes, propose clip ranges from a plain language description of the testimony and answer questions across up to 50 transcripts. Insight Pass sits in front of every summary. It reads the selected sources, asks three or four questions about audience, side, purpose and detail, and hands a plan to the drafting models. Quick Actions run one click summarize, research, timeline, organize and find tasks, and Organize proposes a file structure and naming for a matter. Workspace usage is metered in money against a monthly allowance, and larger tasks consume more of it.
The Summaries product reads a deposition transcript and returns an event timeline, key topics, major admissions, contradictions, impeachment points and suggested cross examination questions. Arbitration and trial versions cover openings and closings, evidence, witnesses, objections, rulings and grounds for appeal, and multiday proceedings get consolidated summaries. A trial day's summary typically arrives in under 30 minutes. Deposition summaries launched in mid 2024, and arbitration, trial and consolidated summaries followed in January 2025. Across witnesses, a cross deposition analysis builds one combined chronology with separate inconsistency and corroboration reports. A four layer chat answers questions about a transcript with a direct answer, an analysis, a strategic note and page and line links. Alongside the summaries, Threadeo Sync aligns video to certified transcripts and links exhibits automatically, and the Depo Viewer shows exhibit summaries offline. CloudReview gives law firms annotation, issue codes and clip export on synced transcripts.
Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure
Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.
Deposition summaries cite page and line and come as Word files or hyperlinked PDFs that open at the testimony. Every medical chronology entry cites its source page. Answers in Workspace's Explore view carry Bates citations, and Deep Research returns a synthesis with linked citations and a source list the user can review. After any summary, Interrogate lets a user ask follow up questions across the whole deposition or record set, with each answer linked to the supporting page. For research beyond the customer's files, case.dev's citation service matches each cited case against CourtListener's database of about 10 million opinions. It returns verified, not found or multiple matches, with the case name, court and decision date. No accuracy figure is published for any output. The terms warn that output may not reflect people, places or facts accurately and must be reviewed before anyone relies on it.
Each insight in a Threadeo summary cites a page and line of the source transcript. Reports come as DOCX and PDF files and as a web view that shows transcript and summary side by side, so a reader can jump from a statement to the testimony behind it. Chat answers end with clickable page and line links. Summaries are said to draw only on the uploaded transcript and to be engineered for zero hallucinations. Arbitration summaries are described as neutral and objective, and trial summaries track objections and evidentiary rulings as they appear in the record. No accuracy measure for the summaries is published.
Autonomy and Oversight Model
What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.
In Source, the exhibit index starts as a draft that the court reporter edits, matches to matter files and approves. Clip ranges proposed from a plain language request come back with the matched testimony, a confidence value and warnings, and a clip is cut only once approved. The reporter keeps sole authority over the certified transcript, and Source prepares what surrounds it. Summaries can be aimed before drafting through Insight Pass, and every output links back to its sources. CaseMark describes a chronology as an organized starting point whose dates, statements and conclusions still need confirming against the underlying records. At the platform layer, case.dev tracks each unit of agent work as a work item that a person approves or blocks with a stated reason. Its privilege detection service returns a review recommendation, calling for attorney review, on ambiguous documents. Two modes run with no person in the loop. Overtime Mode keeps researching, drafting and revising after the first prompt, and the Operator handles recurring tasks it has learned through email, Microsoft Teams and text messages. Neither has a stated limit on what it may do unattended.
In Sync, the platform aligns video and links exhibits, and the court reporting firm reviews the finished job in its own account before it requests load files or delivers to clients. Customer dashboards put the median review at 22 seconds a job. UltraSync, the rush service for law firms, adds a manual check of the uploaded files by Threadeo's team. Summaries come with a side by side view in which a lawyer can check each insight against the transcript and add annotations. A summary returns to the customer as soon as the model finishes. No review step before delivery is described for it, and no limit on how its strategic recommendations may be used.
Operational and Outcome Evidence
Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.
Ogletree Deakins, Nelson Mullins and Pathway are named as users of CaseMark's platform, and CaseMark counts more than 7,000 attorneys among its users. Fortz Legal Support, a Michigan court reporting and litigation support firm, ran one deposition through several summary vendors alongside peer agencies before choosing CaseMark. After one summary for a client, that client's partner asked for summaries of every remaining deposition in the case, and Fortz now sells summaries as a service. A September 2026 post reproduces one month's usage report from an unnamed mid sized insurance defense firm, for 12 August to 11 September. It shows 38 practitioners working 98 litigation matters, 155 deliverables, 1.25 million pages loaded and 841 attorney hours saved, for a flat $3,500 a month. CaseMark values those hours at about $106,000 on the firm's blended rates and calls that an assumed value. A medical malpractice insurer is described as saving $5 for each $1 spent across 300 panel firms in 36 states. The solutions pages quote results such as 90 percent less document review time for small firms and $11,500 in average savings per case for insurers, without a basis. In the Chock Barhoum LLP story, two weeks of document review shrank to minutes. The partner it features, Sarah Tuthill-Kveton, is also CaseMark's Chief Legal Officer.
On customer dashboards that Threadeo publishes, one Sync client runs more than 1,300 jobs a month. A set of 26 video hours needed 14 QC points against 150 on legacy software, and six minutes of work instead of 50. Every job in that set was delivered within 60 minutes, with a median near 10 minutes. Across jobs, median QC time is 22 seconds and 75 percent of jobs need no QC point. Summaries carry quotes from an unnamed injury firm owner, a litigation partner, a senior attorney at an employment firm and a senior public defender. A production manager at a court reporting firm describes Sync work falling from two hours for one job to five minutes across several. No customer is named.
Privilege and Confidentiality Posture
How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.
Training on customer data is ruled out in the terms, and the security page says documents, transcripts and work product remain the customer's. Under the terms, the customer keeps ownership of uploaded data and any interest in the output. Inside a firm, each matter is shared with read or write permission, and a Document Manager seat covers file work without chat or billing access. Custom agents are scoped to the organization, a matter or one person. CaseMark describes the platform as tenant isolated with no commingling of customer data, and Enterprise adds dedicated compute and isolated inference pools. Model providers sign BAAs with CaseMark, and the case.dev gateway serves Anthropic's models from a zero data retention workspace. CaseMark says the architecture itself protects privilege, through tenant isolation, encryption and audit trails. No published policy covers privilege or work product in what the models see or produce.
Section 3.6 of the terms says Threadeo does not use customer data to train AI models, including large language models. It uses only third party services that do not train on the data it passes them. Section 3.1 treats uploads, and the output generated from them, as the customer's confidential information. Section 3.3 gives the customer ownership of that data. The privacy policy names Threadeo as processor of service data under a master service agreement and a data processing addendum, neither of which is published. It states that service data is used only to produce that client's summaries and syncs. Privilege and work product are not addressed, and nothing says how long an outside AI service may hold the data it receives.
UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture
Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.
A No Legal Advice clause in the terms says CaseMark does not practice law, that text from its AI tools is for information only, and that no attorney client relationship forms. Users must be 18 or older and may not present output as written by a person. The service is offered only to people in the United States, and personal data covered by the GDPR may not be uploaded without CaseMark's consent. The products are sold to lawyers, paralegals and litigation support staff rather than to the public. Medical chronologies are described as built for legal team review and not as a substitute for medical or legal judgment. No published material sets out how the product supports a lawyer's supervision of the work it produces.
The terms state that nothing in the service is legal, financial or medical advice and that a customer who needs advice should consult a professional. Users must be 18 or older. Threadeo describes its summaries as clearing the path to legal judgment rather than replacing it. The product pages sell strategic recommendations, impeachment points, cross examination strategy and analysis of how laws and precedents apply to the facts. The arbitration page lists witnesses and experts among its readers, and CloudReview Teams is offered to HR teams as well as legal ones. No jurisdiction limit or supervision guidance is stated.
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.
A September 2026 post by CEO Scott Kveton sets out what CaseMark weighs when it chooses a model provider. The factors are retention, the reach of a BAA, training terms a provider can change, and dependence on one vendor. In July 2026 CaseMark signed the Open Weights and American AI Leadership letter. Its CEO argued that a model a vendor hosts itself cannot be withdrawn, repriced or quietly retuned under a customer. The agent layer is open to inspection. Linc, CaseMark's terminal agent, is MIT licensed and built on the open source pi agent framework. Its legal skills follow an open standard published through agentskills.legal, and custom skills a firm commissions are portable to other platforms. No results from testing its summaries or models are published.
The CEO's November 2025 announcement sets out four commitments on trust, namely the SOC 2 Type 2 examination, HIPAA compliance, the trust center and a public status page. Risk assessment and treatment and vendor risk management appear among the trust center's controls. The CEO's posts set out a six part test for summary quality, covering length, clarity, accuracy, coherence, objectivity and focus. A summary passes when a reader grasps the deposition and the next step in under three minutes. A February 2025 post describes AI as strong at some tasks and weak at many others, and says Threadeo will add capabilities in measured steps aligned with how attorneys work. No testing method or result for the summaries is published.
AI Safety and Data Stewardship
Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.
Customer data is kept for 30 days or for the length of the agreement, then destroyed through a process CaseMark says follows ISO standards. Users can delete a file and its chat themselves, and deletion on request is also offered. Access follows least privilege, with user roles, SAML single sign on and multifactor authentication required on every account. Every user action and system event is logged. Data is encrypted with 256 bit AES at rest and TLS 1.2 in transit. External penetration tests run every year, vulnerability assessments every quarter and dependency updates daily. Staff pass background checks and annual security training. CaseMark publishes more than 130 security controls with their status, among them disaster recovery plans tested each year and cybersecurity insurance. A public status page reports uptime and outages, and payments run through Stripe. No commitment on breach notice to customers is published.
Under the terms, Threadeo keeps customer data as long as the service needs it and deletes it on request. After termination, data stays available for retrieval for 30 days and is then deleted. Sync includes indefinite cloud hosting of every job. Breach notice reaches the customer within 72 hours, with the nature of the breach, the data affected and the steps taken. Access is role based with multifactor authentication and user access reviews. Data is encrypted with TLS in transit and 256 bit AES at rest, and platform activity is logged and monitored. Threadeo tests its disaster recovery and incident response plans and runs penetration tests and vulnerability scans. The privacy policy describes its subprocessors, such as the cloud host, as vetted and contractually bound, without listing them.
AI Liability and Recourse
What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.
The terms of service, last updated 1 October 2026, cap CaseMark's total liability at $100, and more than one claim does not raise the cap. Lost profits, lost data and indirect damages are excluded. The service is provided as is, with warranties of accuracy and noninfringement disclaimed, and any warranty the law requires lasts 90 days. CaseMark's suppliers carry no liability under the same clause. The indemnity runs from the customer to CaseMark, covering use of the service, uploaded data and breaches of law or of the terms. No indemnity runs the other way, and wrong output carries no remedy. Enterprise customers sign a separate agreement on top of these terms, and that agreement is not published.
The terms of December 2024 cap Threadeo's total liability at the fees paid in the 12 months before the claim, with a carve out for bodily injury or death caused by its negligence. Indirect and consequential damages, lost data and business losses are excluded. The terms also exclude liability for the accuracy or reliability of AI generated summaries or output. Against third party claims that the software infringes a United States patent or copyright or misappropriates a trade secret, Threadeo indemnifies customers. Six exclusions apply, and Threadeo may modify the software, license it or refund prepaid fees. A service level agreement guarantees 99 percent uptime with service credits, outside a Sunday maintenance window. Disputes go to the California courts under California law. A separate subscription agreement for monthly plans disclaims all warranties and releases Threadeo from claims arising from use of the platform.
Practice Systems Integration Depth
How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.
Inside Workspace, files arrive by upload and leave by download or by saving back to the matter. CaseMark's own comparison with Harvey lists practice management connectors as coming soon in the product. The case.dev platform underneath publishes connectors in depth. Clio Manage is generally available. It imports matter documents, communications and tasks into a vault and exports work product to a CaseMark Output folder in Clio. Two way sync keeps documents from each side separate and halts on conflicting edits instead of overwriting either. Google Drive needs enablement and Box is in preview, and change detection, rate budgets and reconnection are set out for each provider. Developers reach the platform through an API with SDKs for TypeScript, Python and Go, a command line tool, signed webhooks and an MCP server for Claude, ChatGPT and Microsoft 365 Copilot. Source exports the litigation support formats that trial software reads, including MDB, PTX, LEF and SBF.
Sync produces the load files that trial presentation and case review tools read, including DVT, CMS, MDB, PTF, PTS and XML, with LEF and PTZ on request. Named targets are TrialDirector 360 and older TrialDirector versions, OnCue, CaseNotebook, LexisNexis TextMap, LiveNote, Sanction, Summation, Timaro and TrialPro. Video and transcripts can be pulled in from Box or Dropbox, and Concierge Video stitches multiple files and encodes them inside the Sync account. The offline Depo Viewer, at version 1.1.0 since 10 September 2026, opens synced jobs with clips and exhibit links on Windows 10 and 11 and macOS 12 or later. A court reporting firm on Sync can deliver jobs straight into a law firm's CloudReview account, which supports single sign on and two factor authentication. CloudReview also takes a list of designations and counter designations and applies them to a transcript. An API with key and token management is open to account holders, and Enterprise customers can commission custom integrations at discounted development rates. No connector to a case management or document management system is described.
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.
Customer data sits in AWS and Azure in the United States. The trust center adds that it can be stored in other countries when a customer needs that. CaseMark hosts its open weight models in the United States. Isolation rises by tier. The standard service isolates each tenant, and Enterprise adds dedicated compute and isolated inference pools. Sovereign Legal AI on case.dev offers CaseMark Core on a dedicated GPU cluster, dedicated instances of frontier models, or a managed deployment inside the customer's own AWS, Azure or Google Cloud account. The processing location for closed models from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google is not stated. When OpenAI is down, the gateway routes requests to Azure or Bedrock.
Section 3.5 of the terms names a single AWS region in the United States as the host for Threadeo's services and customer data. The platform runs in the browser with no desktop install, and the Depo Viewer is a separate offline application for Windows and macOS. Enterprise customers can white label the platform on their own domain with their own SSL certificate and email. A public status page reports uptime and performance for every Threadeo system. The security page cites ISO 27001, ISO 9001, SOC 2 and PCI DSS compliant data centers. Where the third party AI services behind the summaries process data is not stated.
Security Certifications and Trust Center
Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.
A SOC 2 Type II report and HIPAA compliance are stated. The trust center, built on Vanta, lists the 2026 SOC 2 Type 2 report and a statement of HIPAA compliance as documents released through a request form. The same center shows more than 130 controls across infrastructure, organizational, product and internal security, each with its status. The report itself, with its auditor and period, sits behind that request form.
A SOC 2 Type 2 examination by Prescient Assurance is complete. The trust center, run on Scytale, lists the report dated 30 October 2025 and a letter of attestation dated 31 October 2025, alongside a 2025 HIPAA completion letter from Scytale. It also shows 40 controls across data, product, access, continuity, organizational and endpoint security. The CEO's announcement of November 2025 names Scytale as the compliance partner. The report and letters sit behind the trust center's request access flow.
Model Supply Chain Disclosure
Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.
The case.dev gateway offers CaseMark's own Core Large, Core Titanium, Core Mini and Embed V1 models. It also offers OpenAI's GPT-6.1 Sol, GPT-6 Sol and GPT-6 Luna, Anthropic's Claude Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5, and Google's Gemini 3.1 Pro and Gemini 3.8 Flash. Workspace lets a user pick from more than 100 models, with a cost multiplier shown for each. By its CEO's account, about two thirds of CaseMark's inference runs on open weight models, and its embedding service runs a self hosted open weight model. Anthropic's models are off by default in Workspace and are switched on for firms that ask. Insight Pass uses a reasoning model to plan each report and lighter models to draft it. No commitment covers telling customers when a model or provider changes.
The summaries are described as AI combined with proprietary analysis, and older transcription pages describe leading speech to text engines combined with proprietary algorithms. The terms say Threadeo uses only third party AI services that do not train on customer data passed to them. Sync's alignment and clip tools are described as proprietary technology, and UltraSync runs on the same engine. No model or provider is named.
Commercial Transparency
Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.
Summaries are sold one at a time with no subscription, at $25 for a legal summary. A medical chronology costs $25 plus $0.01 a page, capped at $100 for one record set of up to 25,000 pages. Transcription costs $5 an hour with a $5 minimum. Workspace starts with a free trial for one user with $5 of usage and no card. Pro is $100 per user a month with $100 of included usage, billed monthly with no annual term. Work beyond the allowance draws on prepaid on demand usage at a 30 percent premium, capped by a team spend limit. Document Manager seats are $20 a month, and a BAA plan starts at $200 per user a month with two custom workflows per firm. Teams, for two to ten users, and Enterprise are quoted. So is Source, which is priced on the certified packages, workflow runs and clips a firm produces. The case.dev developer platform passes model costs through at provider rates and opens with $10 of free usage.
CloudReview Teams costs $199 a month for up to 10 users, plus processing at $0.10 per certified transcript page, $0.25 per minute of synced deposition video and $0.25 per minute of exported clips. It includes a custom subdomain, unlimited collaborators and annotations, caption files in SRT, VTT and SMI, usage reports and priority email support. Enterprise, typically for 50 or more users, is quoted and adds white labeling, phone support, two hours of consulting a month and custom integrations. Sync and Summaries are sold per job and per transcript with no subscription, seats or contracts. Their rates are given on request, and the Depo Viewer is included with every synced deposition at no charge.
Firm and Practice Coverage
Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.
Workspace is sold to solo and small firms, mid sized firms and Am Law scale teams, with in house teams named among its intended buyers. Source serves court reporting and litigation support firms. The solutions pages cover litigation, personal injury, corporate, regulatory and compliance, real estate and family law, plus insurance carriers on the defense side. The workflow library follows that spread, with 663 litigation, 279 transactional, 182 regulatory, 139 corporate and one family law workflow. Record types include depositions, medical records, pleadings, contracts, recordings, and trial, hearing, arbitration and mediation transcripts. Service is limited to the United States, and the Clio connector supports only Clio's United States region. CaseMark's own comparison names bulk review at Vault scale and the breadth of research sources as areas where Harvey is stronger. CaseMark runs monthly Workspace training, with a recorded session aimed at insurance defense. Government buyers are not addressed.
Sync is built for court reporting firms, court reporters and videographers, from solo practitioners to high volume production teams. Summaries serve the same firms, which can offer them to their own clients, and the lawyers who read them. Pages address plaintiff and defense attorneys, public defenders, district attorneys, arbitrators and in house counsel, and CloudReview Teams is offered to court reporting, legal and HR teams. Summaries cover depositions, arbitrations and trials. Sync handles video and audio only proceedings in MP4, MOV, MPEG 1, MPEG 2, WMV, MP3, AAC, FLAC and WAV, including interpreter jobs. No jurisdiction or practice area limit is stated.
The 12 legal signals, side by side
Recorded rather than graded. These are the questions a practitioner has to answer before a tool touches a client matter, and the answers are taken from public material only.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
The content section of the terms of service, updated 1 October 2026, licenses uploaded data to CaseMark only to provide the service. It states that CaseMark does not use customer data to train its AI models or sell it to third parties. The security page repeats that CaseMark never trains models on customer data, and the trust center adds that summaries and conversations are not shared with AI providers for training. Conversation threads are kept only to give context to follow up questions in a session. The terms make any feedback a user sends CaseMark's property and name no carve out for aggregated or deidentified data.
Section 3.6 of Threadeo's terms, last updated December 2024, states that it does not use customer data to train AI models, including large language models. It adds that Threadeo uses only third party services that do not train their models on customer data it passes to them. The privacy policy of September 2025 repeats that service data trains no AI model and is used only for that client's work. The trust page adds that transcripts are not used to train public models.
The policy defines service data as the video, audio, transcripts and documents a client uploads, and says that data belongs to the client. A separate subscription agreement for monthly plans lets Threadeo keep and share usage information in anonymous or aggregate form for business purposes.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
The terms set retention at 30 days, after which customer data is deleted, and enterprise customers can arrange longer retention. CaseMark also keeps data for the length of an agreement and destroys it at the end of that period or on request. Users can delete any file with a trash icon, which also removes its chat, and conversation threads can be deleted at any time. Workspace also keeps a persistent memory of facts across conversations, users and matters.
At the model layer, the case.dev gateway describes zero retention agreements with major providers, while CaseMark notes that Anthropic now keeps data from its newest models for 30 days.
The terms keep customer data for as long as the service requires and guarantee deletion when the customer asks. After termination, data stays available for retrieval for 30 days, export options are offered on request, and the data is then deleted. Sync hosts every job indefinitely by default, as part of the service, with each job viewable at any time from any device. Load file packages and the Depo Viewer package are downloaded to the customer's own systems.
When a monthly plan ends, the subscription agreement requires users to erase anything they downloaded from the platform. Threadeo tests its data backups and restoration. The privacy policy refers to a record retention policy that is not published.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
Workspace keeps its own permission model. Owners and admins assign roles, share each matter with read or write permission, and give support staff Document Manager seats limited to files. Custom agents are scoped to the organization, a matter or one person, and every user action is logged. On case.dev, a matter owner can grant another organization scoped access to a single matter and revoke it later. Vaults on case.dev can be grouped, with API keys scoped to one group.
In Source, a firm targets each delivery to an organization, group or individual and manages its clients' users and groups. Where a firm allows it, clients add their own files to a matter and share selected ones back.
CloudReview keeps its own sharing model. A firm invites partners, associates and paralegals to a transcript, grants edit rights, shares single clips by email and sets who can see each page and line annotation. Each Teams customer works on its own subdomain, and Enterprise customers get a white labeled platform. Role based access control and user access reviews appear among the trust center's controls. Collaborators are notified when an annotation is added and can discuss it in a thread.
Jobs move from a court reporting firm's Sync account to a law firm's CloudReview account rather than by emailed links. Law firms receiving those jobs get free CloudReview accounts with single sign on and two factor authentication.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
The privacy policy, updated 1 October 2026, says CaseMark may share information in response to legal process, including lawful requests by public authorities. The information it covers includes personal information inside the files customers upload. Personal information may also go to subsidiaries, affiliates and service providers bound by confidentiality terms. Neither the policy nor the terms of service say whether the customer is told about such a request.
The same policy says a sale of the business would never disclose the private customer data uploaded to the platform, and that an account assigned to an authorized reseller comes with notice to the customer.
Neither the terms, the monthly subscription agreement nor the privacy policy addresses requests from courts, law enforcement or other third parties for customer data. Section 3.1 of the terms treats customer data and the output generated from it as confidential information that Threadeo may disclose to no third party except in providing the service. The privacy policy says service data is shared only with vetted subprocessors bound by contract to protect it, and is never sold or used for marketing.
Requests from people named in a deposition go to the client that controls the data. The monthly subscription agreement lets Threadeo suspend access for legal or regulatory reasons or action by authorities, without saying whether the customer is told.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
Summaries and Workspace answers draw on the files a customer uploads. For legal research, case.dev draws case law from CourtListener's database of about 10 million opinions. It adds federal court dockets, SEC EDGAR filings, and United States patent and trademark records from the USPTO. Patent lookups cover applications and granted patents, and trademark lookups run against the USPTO's status system. Deep Research in Workspace runs research in several phases and returns memos with linked sources. CaseMark does not say on what terms it uses these sources.
Summaries draw on the transcript the customer uploads. Trial and arbitration summaries include analysis of how laws and precedents apply to the facts, and the source of that law is not named. Arbitration summaries identify the governing law and how it may apply. Sync works only from the certified transcript, video and exhibits the firm supplies. The cross deposition analysis compares the transcripts uploaded for one case. Exhibit summaries in Sync and the Depo Viewer draw on the exhibits a firm links to the transcript.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
case.dev's citation service confirms that a cited case exists in CourtListener and returns verified, not found or multiple matches, with the case name, court, decision date and parallel citations. The result carries no record of how later courts treated the case, such as reversal or overruling. Other endpoints parse Bluebook components from text and pull every citation from a document at a web address. The documentation tells builders to verify a source before citing it.
Citations in Threadeo's output point to a page and line of the uploaded transcript. Where trial and arbitration summaries discuss laws and precedents, they show no check of how later courts treated those authorities. Trial summaries flag the objections and evidentiary rulings that appear in the transcript. Arbitration summaries set out grounds for enforcement, appeal or setting aside, and consolidated trial summaries support appeal preparation across several days.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
Workspace answers and summaries cite their sources, so each statement can be followed back to the record, and deposition summaries embed the full transcript beside the summary. Source drafts exhibit indexes only from exhibits introduced, marked or admitted in the transcript, and it attaches warnings to the clip ranges it proposes. The case.dev privilege service returns a review recommendation for ambiguous documents. No behavior is described for a question that the uploaded record cannot answer.
Summaries are said to be engineered for zero hallucinations, with every statement tied to the uploaded transcript and every chat answer ending in page and line links. No behavior is described for a question that the transcript cannot answer. In Sync, the platform flags QC points for the reporter to review, and UltraSync's team contacts the customer at once if uploaded files have problems.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, which records court decisions worldwide that address hallucinated AI content and the tool involved where known, has no entry naming CaseMark or case.dev. CaseMark's products summarize depositions, medical records and other case files for litigation teams and court reporters.
The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, which records court decisions worldwide that address hallucinated AI content and the tool involved where known, has no entry naming Threadeo. Threadeo's products sync deposition video and summarize deposition, arbitration and trial transcripts for court reporting firms and lawyers.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
An October 2025 customer story on Chock Barhoum LLP cites American Bar Association Rule 1.1 on competence in relevant technology. It quotes partner Sarah Tuthill-Kveton's view that refusing to use AI could itself be an ethics violation. The same story presents SOC 2 Type II audits and HIPAA compliance as the answer to confidentiality concerns about AI. No ethics opinion is tied to a CaseMark feature.
No bar rule or ethics opinion appears in the terms, product material or blog. The Litigator's Edge podcast interviews trial lawyers about practice and technology, with guests such as Steven Molo and Bob Christie. Threadeo sponsors the podcast, and its CEO hosts it. The CEO's posts discuss the profession's caution about new technology and how AI should fit the way attorneys already work.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
Each customer gets a monthly one page report of hours saved and deliverables produced. A September 2026 post built on one such report says much of the saved time at an insurance defense firm would otherwise have been billed to a carrier. It adds that a firm getting hours back must choose whether to bill them elsewhere, take on more matters or hire fewer people. The same post says a major insurance carrier will require AI on matters across its defense panel of about 300 firms from January 2027, and that CaseMark is on that carrier's list.
Workspace bills a flat fee per user or per firm. Source lets a court reporting firm set its own client price for each summary or clip it sells. No guidance on fee treatment or client disclosure is published.
Summaries are claimed to cut the time to analysis of a deposition by 80 percent or more, free partner hours for strategy and let a firm take on more cases. Court reporting firms are told they can offer summaries to their clients as a new service. Sync is pitched to those firms as protecting revenue, at direct cost parity with legacy desktop software, and is priced per job so a firm's cost follows its volume. Summaries carry no subscription, so a firm pays only for the transcripts it analyzes. No guidance on billing or client disclosure is published.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
SIG Lite 2024 and CAIQ questionnaires, penetration test summaries and attestation letters are available on request. The trust center releases the 2026 SOC 2 Type 2 report and a HIPAA statement through a request form. CaseMark states it acts as a processor of the customer data it handles. Its trust center FAQ answers common questionnaire items on hosting, retention, deletion, single sign on and the API. Employees and contractors sign confidentiality agreements, and new hires pass background checks. No subprocessor list is published.
Policies on availability, privacy, confidentiality and disaster recovery are offered to customers on demand. The SOC 2 Type 2 report, letter of attestation and HIPAA completion letter come through the trust center's request access flow. Subprocessors are described as vetted and bound by contract, without a list. Anyone can view the trust center's 40 controls and their status, vendor risk management among them. Threadeo's team shares documentation and answers security questions in a consultation.
A designated privacy officer handles data questions, and Threadeo helps clients answer access and deletion requests under its DPA.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
Every summary cites page and line or source page, Workspace answers carry Bates citations, and users choose the model that runs a task. The platform logs every user action and system event. On case.dev, a matter's history of work items, decisions and notes exports as JSON, CSV, TSV or JSONL, up to 10,000 entries a request. Logs take manual notes as well, and exports are offered for audits and evaluation pipelines. Source records whether each delivered file has been viewed, downloaded or discussed by the client. No single export brings these together for one document.
Each summary insight cites a page and line, and the side by side view links summary and transcript. Platform activity is logged, and Sync records the QC points on each job. CloudReview exports page and line reports filtered by deponent or issue code to PDF, and any annotation on a synced transcript can become a captioned clip. Summaries come in several styles as DOCX and PDF files. The chat labels each answer's direct reply, analysis, strategic note and citations as separate parts. No per summary record of how it was produced is exported.
The questions both sides leave open
Derived from the records above rather than written, so it cannot favor either vendor. Take these into both conversations and ask each side the same question.
- Good Law Verification
- Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
Which one fits
Choose CaseMark if
- You want to sell more than transcripts. Source turns your client portal into a catalog of summaries, chronologies and clips that clients order directly, billed your way under your brand.
- Certification and packaging take your production team's evenings. Source certifies once and builds certified PDF, condensed, word index, LEF, PTX and MDB files into one ZIP with a manifest.
- Your clients ask for medical chronologies. CaseMark builds cited chronologies from record sets of up to 25,000 pages and can follow a firm's own format.
Choose Threadeo if
- Sync is the bottleneck. Threadeo Sync runs a day's jobs in parallel in the browser, with customer dashboards showing a median of 22 seconds of QC per job.
- Your law firm clients want to review and clip testimony themselves. CloudReview lets them annotate synced transcripts with objections and issue codes and export captioned clips.
- You want the vendor's terms to carry real recourse. Threadeo's terms cap liability at 12 months of fees, indemnify against IP claims and guarantee 99 percent uptime with service credits.
In summary
CaseMark
CaseMark, from CaseMark AI, Inc. of Portland, Oregon, sells Source to court reporting and litigation support firms. Source packages a certified transcript into twelve formats, drafts exhibit indexes for the reporter to approve and syncs video. It also turns a firm's portal into a catalog where clients order summaries and chronologies under the firm's brand. According to the AI Legal Index, training on customer data is ruled out in CaseMark's terms, and the models on its case.dev gateway are named. CaseMark also sells summaries one at a time and a Workspace for law firms.
Threadeo
Threadeo, from Threadeo Inc. of San Francisco, sells Threadeo Sync, which aligns deposition video with certified transcripts and generates load files for trial software, and Threadeo Summaries for deposition, arbitration and trial transcripts. Law firms review and clip synced transcripts in CloudReview. According to the AI Legal Index, Threadeo's terms bar training on customer data, guarantee deletion on request and promise breach notice within 72 hours. Its SOC 2 Type 2 report from Prescient Assurance is dated 30 October 2025.
Questions buyers ask
CaseMark Source vs Threadeo: which fits a court reporting firm?
Threadeo fits a firm whose main need is fast, accurate video sync and load file delivery, with summaries ordered per transcript. CaseMark Source fits a firm that wants certification, packaging, exhibit work, clips and a client facing service catalog in one platform. Each serves videographers and reporting agencies, and each syncs video to certified transcripts. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 12, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Which trial presentation formats does each produce?
Threadeo Sync generates DVT, CMS, MDB, PTF, PTS and XML load files, with LEF and PTZ on request, for TrialDirector, OnCue, Sanction, Summation, TextMap and others. CaseMark Source produces twelve formats from one certification, including certified PDF, condensed PDF, DOCX, word index, LEF, SBF, XMEF, AMICUS TXT, PTF, PTX and MDB. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 12, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
How do their deposition summaries differ?
Threadeo summaries go beyond a shortened transcript, adding admissions, contradictions, impeachment points and cross examination strategy, with a cross deposition report and a four layer chat. CaseMark offers analysis, index, page and line and narrative formats, an Insight Pass step that sets audience and side before drafting, and chat across up to 50 transcripts in Source. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 12, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Can a reporting firm resell AI summaries under its own name?
Yes, with either. Threadeo pitches summaries as a service court reporting firms can offer their clients. CaseMark Source is built around that model, with a branded portal, a domain of the firm's own and client facing prices the firm sets for each workflow. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 12, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
What do their contracts say about liability?
Threadeo's terms of December 2024 cap liability at fees paid in the prior 12 months, indemnify customers against IP infringement claims, guarantee 99 percent uptime with service credits and exclude liability for AI output accuracy. CaseMark's terms of October 2026 cap total liability at $100, offer no indemnity to the customer and no uptime guarantee. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 12, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Neither vendor paid for inclusion, placement or a grade, and neither reviewed this page before it published. Everything on it comes from public material on the dates shown. How the index grades.
Threadeo Inc. is a Delaware corporation based in San Francisco with no parent company stated, and CaseMark AI, Inc. is a venture backed company in Portland, Oregon with none. CaseMark publishes its own comparison with Threadeo, which this page does not draw on. Neither vendor reviewed this page.