D
Dazychain
Dazychain is matter management software for small to medium in house legal departments, made by Yarris Technologies of Melbourne, with an office in Boston. Requests arrive through an intake form or by email and become matters automatically, with the right lawyer assigned, and move through configurable workflows with tasks, due dates, approvals and reminders. Around that sit document and contract management with Word editing, an internal client portal, an external portal for law firms, spend and budget tracking with invoice review, and dashboards.
DazychainAI runs only when a user clicks a function, works only inside the matter or document it was engaged on, and can be switched off for an account. It summarizes matters and documents, finds information in them, answers questions over documents and compares an incoming contract with a corporate playbook. All AI runs on Amazon Bedrock in Australia or the United States, and Dazychain states that inputs and outputs are not stored and that customer information is not used to train external models.
Three plans are priced per user per month, with a 14 day trial. Dazychain states ISO 27001 and SOC 2, with data hosted in Australia and the United States.
Dazychain, head to head
Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.
Alternatives to Dazychain
Vendors in the same categories as Dazychain whose graded profiles look most alike, with a line on what each product does.
Similar is not the same, so check that each one does the job you need. No vendor pays for placement.
- BBigHandBigHand supplies law firms with applications for workforce allocation, document production, pricing, billing review and financial reporting.
- LLuplLupl is a legal work management platform for law firms and legal departments, owned by Elevate since August 2026.
- TTonkean LegalWorksTonkean LegalWorks is matter lifecycle management for in house legal departments, built to get the business to use legal's processes.
- DDiliTrustDiliTrust combines contract lifecycle management, board meetings, legal entities, matters and secure file sharing in one governance suite.
- LLegitoLegito is a no code document automation and contract lifecycle management platform for legal, procurement, HR, finance and other back office teams, operated by Legito s.r.o. of the Czech Republic.
- SStreamline AIStreamline AI manages intake and ongoing work for internal legal departments.
Ordered by how closely the graded profiles match across the 15 capability axes, inside the same categories. See how each axis is graded in the methodology.
Capability grades
All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. 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.
Dazychain sells matter management first, described in its footer as capture, triage, manage, resolve. Its pricing table shows a complete platform on every plan, with AI as one section among matter management, documents, spend, collaboration, workflow, reporting and integrations. AI use is capped on Launch and unlimited on Scale and Optimize. DazychainAI runs only when a user clicks a function, and the AI FAQ says it can be turned off completely for an account, which leaves a working matter management system.
The AI summarizes matters and documents, finds information across a matter's content, answers questions about the customer's documents and compares an external contract with the customer's playbook. Saved AI summaries and outcomes can be reused in the matter. All of it sits on top of the matter record rather than forming it.
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.
Extractions are designed to be highly accurate, the AI FAQ says, but like any automated system they may need review. Users validate and edit extractions in the platform before anything is finalized or shared. A limitations entry adds that the AI works only within the matter or document it is engaged on, and that clear, well structured and complete documents give better results. Dazychain gives no accuracy figure, test set or error rate, and does not describe how a summary, extraction or answer points back to the passage it came from.
The AI page credits Amazon Bedrock with detecting correct responses and minimizing hallucinations and ambiguity. That is a statement about the hosting service rather than a measure of DazychainAI's own output on matters and contracts.
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.
DazychainAI acts only when a user engages it. The AI FAQ says it accesses data only when a user actively engages an AI function, such as clicking a button, so confidential matters stay untouched until assistance is requested. It works only within the matter or document it is engaged on and does not reach data outside that context. Extractions may need review, and users validate and edit them in the platform before anything is finalized or shared.
AI can be turned off entirely for an account, and the FAQ's answer on restricting AI by role or matter type offers only that account wide switch. Outputs carry no confidence indicator, and no threshold or abstention state is described. Separately, the intake feature lets business users generate a document such as a nondisclosure agreement from a template the legal team approved in advance.
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.
Each client story names the organization and the people involved. Helen Carr, Deputy General Counsel at MYOB, describes using Dazychain's matter data to show growth in the volume and complexity of matters and to win additional headcount. Mercia Chapman, Senior Legal Counsel at Equity Trustees, speaks on email capture and retrieval. Further stories cover Perenti's global mining legal work, SEE Civil's time saved finding files, and process improvements at Sage Automation, with VicReturn, Education Services Australia and SAGE Group also listed.
The MYOB account describes an operational outcome that the platform's reporting made possible. The stories are not dated, and no quantity is attached to any customer's result.
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.
Tenant aware segregation keeps each customer's information out of reach of every other customer unless permission is given, as in a collaboration, and the security page describes it as fully supported. Data is encrypted with AES 256 at rest in a MongoDB store and with HTTPS and TLS 1.3 in transit, and documents sit encrypted in Amazon S3. Role based access applies on every plan, and every access and change to documents, matters and deliverables is logged and preserved.
DazychainAI reaches nothing until a user clicks and stays inside the matter or document engaged. Amazon Bedrock does not store its inputs or outputs, each model runs in a dedicated AWS account, and customer information is not used to train external models. These commitments sit in the FAQ and the security page rather than a contract on the site. Staff sign confidentiality agreements and take annual security training, and privilege and work product get no separate treatment.
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.
Although DazychainAI drafts summaries and answers questions about legal documents, the site draws no advice line. The only legal document the site links is a privacy policy, with no terms of service, end user agreement or disclaimer page. The AI FAQ notes that extractions may need review and that users validate them before anything is shared. It does not say that output is not legal advice or that a lawyer must review generated content before it is relied on.
Business users who are not lawyers can complete an intake form that feeds a template approved in advance and generates a tailored document, such as a nondisclosure agreement. The AI page says that document can be reviewed or sent back to the requester without manual intervention, and sets no legal checkpoint around that choice. No rule of professional conduct, bar authority or jurisdiction limit is named.
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.
The AI FAQ covers what DazychainAI does, where it runs, what data it uses, how to switch it off and its limits, and the security page covers information security. Neither sets out AI principles, an owner accountable for model behavior, testing before release or findings on bias. The nearest structure is the Information Security Management System, with documented policies, annual staff training and documented acceptance, which governs staff conduct and data security rather than model behavior.
DazychainAI's limits run through product design instead. The AI stays inactive until a user clicks, works inside one matter or document and can be switched off for the whole account, and the FAQ offers no narrower control by role or matter type. Dazychain holds no ISO/IEC 42001 certification.
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.
On termination Dazychain keeps customer data for the period the customer requests, usually one month, then deletes it, with other arrangements on request. The FAQ gives backup retention of two weeks for the MongoDB database and unlimited retention for documents in Amazon S3. Access control runs through role based access on every plan and an audit trail that logs every access and every change to documents, matters and deliverables.
Staff pass police background screening on joining and every two years, sign confidentiality agreements and take annual security training. Data is encrypted with AES 256 at rest and TLS 1.3 in transit. Amazon hosts the application and files and Object Rocket the database. The FAQ says all subprocessors, such as AWS, ObjectRocket, CloudFront and SIEM providers, are bound by contractual controls, without listing them all.
Penetration testing runs internally before each release and annually through an outside agency, and AWS multiple availability zones serve as the disaster recovery setup. Dazychain states compliance with the Australian Privacy Act 1988 and GDPR. Dazychain sets no breach notification period or commitment on its site.
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.
A privacy policy and a sitemap are the only legal documents linked from the site, with no terms of service, subscription agreement, end user terms or service level document. The FAQ refers to data processing agreements and a 12 month minimum contract term, which sit in documents signed with each customer. Indemnities, liability caps, warranties, exclusions and insurance are left to that signed contract. The AI FAQ describes output as designed to be highly accurate while noting that it may need review.
How loss from a wrong summary, extraction or playbook comparison is shared between Dazychain and a customer depends on the contract offered in a sales process. The privacy policy is the only document on the site that governs customer data.
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.
The integrations page and FAQ name each connection and what it does. Outlook creates matters from emails and files messages into existing matters, including from shared mailboxes, and Gmail does the same without shared inbox support. Word documents are created, edited and redlined inside matters with version history, and DocuSign sends documents for signature from a workflow. The FAQ adds ServiceNow and single sign on through Okta, Microsoft Entra and other SAML providers, and the pricing table lists SCIM and ADFS.
The pricing table shows API access on Optimize, while the FAQ says API and webhook capabilities are not available, and the integrations page offers API based HR system integrations on request. SharePoint and a document library and knowledge base are listed as coming soon. The pages describe what each email and document connection does, without configuration detail.
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.
Application data sits in Amazon data centers in Australia and the United States, the security page says, with the database at Object Rocket in the same two regions and documents in Amazon S3, across multiple availability zones. The AI runs on Amazon Bedrock in Australia or the United States according to the customer's location, with each model in a dedicated AWS account, so processing is addressed apart from storage.
Older FAQ entries and the privacy policy say data is stored in Australia, and the privacy policy says personal information is not disclosed outside Australia without consent. Segregation is described as tenant aware, without describing the architecture. No single tenant, dedicated or self hosted option is offered, no region choice is presented to the buyer, and deployment does not change between the three plans. Dazychain has offices in Melbourne and Boston.
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.
Dazychain states that its ISO 27001 controls and wider Information Security Management System are audited internally and externally each year. It also states that SOC 2 internal and external audits run annually and produce SOC 2 reports. No auditor or certifying body is named, and no SOC 2 type is given, so the page does not say whether the report covers a point in time or a period. The certificate and reports carry no date, period or scope, and Dazychain offers no trust portal or request form for them.
The ISO claim cites the 2013 edition of ISO 27001, whose transition period to the 2022 edition ended in October 2025. AWS certifications listed alongside, including FedRAMP and SOC 1, belong to AWS. Penetration testing runs internally before each release and annually through an outside agency.
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.
All DazychainAI tools run on Amazon Bedrock, with each model in a dedicated AWS account. Bedrock does not store inputs or outputs, share them with third parties or use them for training, and inference runs in Australia or the United States according to the customer's location. The service, the region and the data conditions are stated, while the model maker is not. Bedrock hosts models from several makers, and Dazychain names no model or version and does not say which model produces a summary as against a playbook comparison.
Dazychain sets no notice period for a change of model, version or hosting arrangement, and its FAQ binds subprocessors such as AWS through contractual controls without listing them.
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.
Dazychain's pricing page lists three plans per user per month, Launch at $105, Scale at $130 and Optimize at $160. A currency selector offers Australian dollars, United States dollars, euros and pounds, and the figures carry a bare dollar sign. Launch carries no implementation fee. Scale offers customized configuration and implementation as a $5,000 option, and Optimize lists it at $5,000, while the FAQ says implementation is completely free.
Reconfiguration is a professional services fee on the lower plans, and Optimize includes one each year. A feature table of about forty rows splits matter management, documents, spend, collaboration, AI, workflow, reporting, integrations, security and support by plan, and AI use is capped on Launch and unlimited above it. A 14 day trial starts from a sign up form, followed by workspace setup and an hour of training. The FAQ sets a 12 month minimum term and says Dazychain does not usually offer pilots.
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.
Corporate legal departments are the market Dazychain is built for, and its FAQ narrows that to small to medium sized in house legal teams. Pricing per user lets a team size itself. Its case studies name MYOB, Equity Trustees, VicReturn, Education Services Australia, SAGE Group, Sage Automation, Perenti and SEE Civil, mostly Australian organizations. The same platform is sold to HR teams under a separate product line, with case types such as investigations, performance management and protected disclosures, and Dazychain describes a front door spanning legal, HR and finance.
The system works with any matter type, and the FAQ names charities, non profits, research and utility companies, superannuation and finance, construction and mining among the industries it serves. Dazychain has offices in Melbourne and Boston and hosts data in Australia and the United States. No jurisdictional coverage, team size limit or work the product is not suited to is stated.
4 public documents
The public pages on file for Dazychain, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.
-
dazychain.com/features/security2 signals
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation, Court Disclosure Support
Read Sep 4, 2026
-
dazychain.com/legal/legal-ai-22 signals
Client Data in Training, Prompt and Output Retention
Read Oct 9, 2026
-
Fabricated Citation Record
Read Oct 9, 2026
-
dazychain.com/privacy-policy1 signal
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
Read Oct 9, 2026
From $105 per user/month
- Dazychain prints its prices.
- There are three plans charged per person per month, with Launch at $105, Scale at $130 and Optimize at $160.
- The cheapest plan includes the AI features but caps how much you can use them, and the two more expensive plans make AI unlimited.
- Setup is free on the cheapest plan, and the pricing page lists $5,000 for configuration and implementation on the other two, optional on Scale, while the FAQ says implementation is free.
- A 14 day trial starts with a sign up form and includes an hour of training, and the minimum contract term is 12 months.
The pricing page publishes the rate card with the unit stated. Three plans are charged per user per month, with Launch at $105, Scale at $130 and Optimize at $160, and a currency selector for Australian dollars, United States dollars, euros and pounds. Launch is a preconfigured start with standard intake forms, workflows and matter templates, core matter, task and document features, an internal client portal, dashboards, and AI subject to usage caps.
Its integrations are single sign on, Outlook, Gmail and DocuSign, and it carries no implementation fee. Scale adds an external firm portal, customized document automations and intake forms, unlimited AI and all integrations, with customized configuration and implementation as a $5,000 option. Optimize adds more automations and intake forms, advanced intake routing, API access, one annual reconfiguration and a dedicated customer success manager, with configuration and implementation listed at $5,000. The FAQ says implementation is completely free and sets a 12 month minimum term.
Implementation: Launch has no implementation fee. The pricing page lists customized configuration and implementation at $5,000, optional on Scale and listed on Optimize, and reconfiguration as a professional services fee on the lower plans. The FAQ says implementation is completely free, with training and support included, and gives two weeks to two months for implementation depending on the organization.
Confidentiality and data terms: Dazychain's FAQ refers to data processing agreements with customers, which are not published.
Note: Prices show a bare dollar sign with a currency selector, and the quote form defaults to the United States. Ongoing training and support are included, and Dazychain does not usually offer pilots or proofs of concept.
Legal Signals
What each signal meansA signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
A public policy or trust page states no training on customer content, with no matching term located in the published agreement.
Customer information is never used to train external AI models, the AI FAQ says, and the platform uses only the data within the document or matter being worked on, combined with Amazon Bedrock's services. The AI page adds that Bedrock does not use inputs or outputs for training. Each statement covers external models, and Dazychain says nothing about training, tuning or evaluating models of its own or of its parent, Yarris Technologies.
The site links no terms of service, subscription agreement or end user terms, so these commitments sit in the FAQ and the AI page rather than in a contract term. The privacy policy and a sitemap are the only documents linked from its navigation and footer. A customer can switch DazychainAI off for its whole account, so no matter data reaches the models.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
The customer controls the retention window, by product configuration or by contractual instruction, but zero retention is not stated as available.
Amazon Bedrock does not store DazychainAI inputs or outputs, according to Dazychain's AI page, and each model runs in a dedicated AWS account. Saved AI summaries and outcomes become part of the matter record and can be reused. On termination, customer data is kept for the period the customer requests, usually one month, then deleted, with other arrangements available on request. The FAQ gives backup retention of two weeks for the database and unlimited retention for documents in Amazon S3, where documents are encrypted with AES 256.
Dazychain sets no retention period during the subscription, on any plan, for matter records or the AI output saved into them. The audit trail keeps every access and change to documents, matters and deliverables.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.
The security page states that data segregation is fully supported and tenant aware, and that no user company can access another's information unless permission has been provided, as in a collaboration. Role based access applies, with every access and modification logged. On the AI side the model reaches nothing until a user engages a function, and it works only within the matter or document engaged rather than across the account.
There is no wall at matter level inside a single legal department. Dazychain describes no conflicts management, restricted matters or walled user view. The vendor's FAQ asks whether AI can be restricted by role or matter type and answers only that it can be switched off for the whole account.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
Published terms or policy address disclosure to authorities or in response to legal process, and no commitment or reservation regarding customer notice is located anywhere. The vendor has told the customer that data can leave and has said nothing about whether the customer hears of it.
Under the privacy policy, Dazychain discloses personal data to government institutions and authorities only where the law requires, and personal information outside Australia only with consent. It states no commitment to tell the customer when a disclosure is required. Any contractual notice term would sit in the data processing agreements the FAQ says Dazychain signs with customers, and Dazychain issues no transparency report.
The FAQ adds that subprocessors such as AWS and ObjectRocket are bound by contractual controls. The security page says data is not shared with third parties and that users may choose to share information with external lawyers. Hosting spans Australia and the United States on the security page, so matter data can sit under two disclosure regimes, while the privacy policy says Dazychain stores its data on servers in Australia.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
No located public material identifies the corpus behind the product’s answers.
DazychainAI works only on the customer's own material. The AI FAQ says it uses only the data within the document or matter being worked on. The features operate on uploaded contracts, matter records, emails and the customer's own contract playbook. The product retrieves no primary law, published precedent, market clause bank or licensed dataset, and names none. The playbook comparison is the one feature that measures a contract against a standard, and that standard is the customer's own playbook rather than content Dazychain supplies.
Intake document generation likewise fills templates the customer's legal team approved in advance, so no outside licensing question arises.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.
Dazychain manages matters, documents and spend, and its AI summarizes, finds information in and answers questions about the customer's own documents and compares a contract with the customer's playbook. No case, statute or regulation appears to a user anywhere in the workflow, so a citator sits outside the product. The playbook comparison flags where an external contract departs from the customer's playbook, and keeping the playbook current is the legal team's work.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.
The AI FAQ's limitations entry says the AI works only within the matter or document it is engaged on and does not reach data outside that context. It adds that clear, well structured and complete documents give better results. A second entry says extractions are designed to be highly accurate but may require review, and that users validate and edit them before anything is finalized or shared. Neither entry says what the system does when it cannot ground an output, such as a scanned contract or a playbook point with no matching clause.
Outputs carry no confidence indicator, and no state for declining to answer is described. The FAQ asks whether AI can be restricted by role or matter type and answers only that it can be switched off for the whole account. DazychainAI acts only when a user engages it, so every output follows a user's request.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.
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 Dazychain or its parent Yarris. DazychainAI summarizes and answers questions about the customer's own matter documents rather than producing court filings.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
No located public material engages with bar or ethics guidance.
Dazychain names no bar authority, conduct rule or ethics opinion, and maps no guidance to a jurisdiction. Its compliance material covers data protection, running to the Australian Privacy Act 1988 and related state laws, GDPR, ISO 27001 and SOC 2. One feature touches professional responsibility directly. Business users who are not lawyers can complete an intake form that generates a finished document, such as a nondisclosure agreement, from a template approved in advance.
Dazychain says nothing about the legal department's duties when it approves such a template or lets the document go out without review. DazychainAI's limits, such as acting only when a user clicks and only inside one matter, are presented as security and data controls rather than tied to a lawyer's duty of competence or supervision.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
The buyer is the payer, not the biller. The product exists to review, author or benchmark legal fees, so the record of fees is the product itself rather than a byproduct of AI assisted lawyering. Typically sold to in-house teams paying outside counsel.
Dazychain carries spend and budget management, invoice review workflows, spend analytics, schedules of rates and budget tracking for what the department pays its external law firms. The AI material says the platform helps lawyers save time, removes friction from drafting, reporting and summarization, and lets teams get work done in a fraction of the time, with no figure attached. Dazychain draws no link between that time saved and what outside firms bill.
The matter record does not mark which summaries or playbook comparisons the model produced, either in the matter or in reports to the business. Invoice review runs as a workflow beside the department's schedules of rates and budgets.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
No located public material supports a client side disclosure obligation.
Application and file hosting sits with Amazon in Australia and the United States, with the database at Object Rocket and AI on Amazon Bedrock, as the security and AI pages describe. Each model runs in a dedicated AWS account with no storage of inputs or outputs. The FAQ says all subprocessors, such as AWS, ObjectRocket, CloudFront and SIEM providers, are bound by contractual controls, and refers to data processing agreements signed with each customer.
The site carries no subprocessor list or agreement. Bedrock hosts models from several makers and Dazychain names none, so the model that reads a contract is unidentified. Dazychain offers no summary written for a legal department to pass to its business, auditors or regulators.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.
The security page says every access to the platform and every modification to legal documents, matters and deliverables is logged and preserved, as a safeguard against unauthorized activity. Audit trails and activity tracking appear as an included feature on all three plans, alongside exportable reports and dashboards, so an exportable record of what happened to a matter exists. The log does not mark which summaries, extractions or playbook comparisons came from the model rather than a person.
Saved AI summaries and outcomes stay in the matter record, where each later change is logged. No model or version is attached to any output, and Dazychain offers no guidance or template for disclosing AI use to a court, regulator or client.