R
Rev

Rev, from Rev.com, Inc. of Austin, Texas, is an investigative intelligence and legal transcription platform for criminal prosecution and defense teams, civil law firms, law enforcement and court reporting agencies. It transcribes audio and video with its own speech recognition models and analyzes up to 500 case files at once across audio, video, documents and images, with every finding cited back to a timestamp or page and line.

It drafts investigative summaries, chronologies, affidavits and briefs in a document editor, searches case photos for people and details, and offers prebuilt and custom workflow templates, with a mobile app for recording interviews. Services verified by people sit beside the platform: human transcription and captions, rough draft and premium legal transcripts, self service court reporting, and deposition summaries from SmartDepo, which Rev acquired. Plans run from free to $59.99 per seat per month, with an Unlimited plan quoted.

Compared with

Rev, 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.

Build your own comparison

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.

AA on AI CentralityThe artificial intelligence is the product. Remove the models and there is nothing left to sell.

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.

Rev's own speech recognition models transcribe every file, and its AI analyzes whole case files at once, drafts summaries, chronologies, affidavits and briefs in an agentic editor, and searches case photos. Human transcription, captions and deposition summaries are sold beside the platform, but the platform itself is AI throughout.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Citation Accuracy and Hallucination DisclosureGrounding is real and documented, with linked primary sources and a described retrieval method, short of published accuracy figures an outsider can test.

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.

Every finding links to a citation with the exact timestamp and source file, with page and line citations for depositions, so a user can check it in seconds. Rev says its AI draws findings only from the files uploaded to a case rather than the internet. Accuracy is published for transcription alone: 96% or better for AI transcripts and 99% or better, guaranteed, for human transcripts, without the test behind the AI figure. No error rate is published for analysis across files or for drafting.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside a supervising lawyer, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.

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.

Every finding is linked to its source for review, drafts open in an editor, and human verified transcription is offered where accuracy matters most. The Terms of Service make the customer solely responsible for verifying the accuracy and completeness of all work product before acting on it. The agentic editor drafts documents directly from an instruction, and nothing states what it may not be used for without review.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Operational and Outcome EvidenceReal deployment evidence with substance, short of full attribution or measurement: a named customer without figures, or figures without the named customer.

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.

Case studies describe Doubek, Pyfer & Storrar cutting legal drafting time by 97%, Greening Law Group's review of body camera footage that used to take 10 to 30 hours, and Anderson Law cutting evidence review time by 94%. The figures are reported by the firms with no stated method, and the studies carry no dates. Rev says it serves more than 1 million users and 125,000 organizations.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Privilege and Confidentiality PostureConfidentiality is asserted in general terms, or the commitment lives only in a sales conversation and cannot be read in advance.

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.

The Terms of Service bind both parties to confidentiality, and human transcriptionists are ID verified and sign NDAs. The same terms let customer content feed continuous training of Rev's in house models, and no way to opt out is published. Privilege, the retention period and the identity of the generative models used are not addressed.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on UPL and Professional Responsibility PostureA boilerplate disclaimer sits in the terms while the marketing describes the product in advice terms, or the intended audience is left ambiguous.

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.

The Terms of Service say the services use AI, speech recognition or human work, and leave verification of all work product to the customer. Nothing states that Rev gives no legal advice or addresses supervision, while the platform is sold to draft legal briefs, affidavits and investigative summaries for filing or sending.

Source: Vendor Published
DD on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureNo governance position published for a system whose output affects legal outcomes.

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.

No AI governance framework, accountable owner, testing before release, or finding on how transcription or analysis performs across accents, languages or audio quality is published.

Source: Operator Verified
CC on AI Safety and Data StewardshipA generic privacy policy covers the product without addressing what happens to documents and prompts after processing.

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.

The security page lists working controls: SSO, multifactor authentication and domain claiming, encryption in transit and at rest, backups several times a day, sharing permissions set per file, and ID checks and NDAs for human transcriptionists. Retention is set by Rev without a stated period. No subprocessor list or incident notification commitment is published.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on AI Liability and RecourseLiability is addressed only through a standard limitation clause that disclaims the exposure the product creates.

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 exclude consequential and indirect damages and limit Rev's liability, disclaim warranties for AI, speech recognition and human work, and require the customer to indemnify Rev for claims arising from its content and use. Nothing stands behind a transcript or analysis that proves wrong.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Practice Systems Integration DepthReal integrations exist and are documented, short of depth: named connections without a description of what they actually move.

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.

Files can be pulled in from Clio, Dropbox or Google Drive among other sources, and the Pro plan adds a Clio Manage integration. An API for speech to text is documented separately at rev.ai. Nothing published describes what syncs back to practice systems or how each connection is configured.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyCloud delivery is implied and neither the tenancy model nor the region is stated.

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.

Files sit on Amazon S3 with server side encryption at rest, according to the security page. That names the host and nothing more: no region, tenancy model, processing location or deployment option other than the hosted service is stated.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Security Certifications and Trust CenterCertification is real and stated, short of accessible evidence: a named standard without scope, date, or a way to obtain the report.

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.

The security page states SOC 2 Type II compliance, CJIS and HIPAA compliance, and that a SOC 3 report is available for review. No auditor, report period or link to the SOC 3 report is published.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Model Supply Chain DisclosureThe vendor refers to advanced or proprietary models without identifying what sits underneath.

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.

Speech recognition runs on Rev's own models, which the Terms of Service call proprietary and maintained in house. The AI services also rely on generative AI models, and neither those models nor their providers are named. No change notification is published.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Commercial TransparencyReal pricing is published for part of the range, with enterprise tiers withheld, or the unit and structure are stated without the figure.

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.

Prices are published for every plan but Unlimited. The plan table shows a free plan and two paid plans, Essentials and Pro, each with annual and monthly prices per seat and limits on files and minutes, and human transcription is priced by the minute. The Unlimited plan, with CJIS and HIPAA controls and SSO, is priced by a specialist.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Firm and Practice CoverageSegment and practice coverage is described with substance, short of the boundaries: what is supported is clear, what is not is left open.

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.

The site addresses criminal prosecution, criminal defense, law enforcement, civil law firms and court reporting agencies, and lists transcription in 37 or more languages on the Pro plan. What case types, file formats or jurisdictions it does not handle is not stated.

Source: Vendor Published
Sources on file

4 public documents

The public pages on file for Rev, 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.

Pricing

$25.49 per seat per month, billed annually (Essentials)

USD, as published, never converted
  • Rev has a free plan with 45 AI transcription minutes a month.
  • Essentials is $25.49 per seat per month billed annually, or $29.99 month to month.
  • Pro is $47.99 per seat per month billed annually, or $59.99 month to month.
  • The Unlimited plan, with CJIS and HIPAA controls and SSO, is priced by a specialist.
  • Human transcription costs $1.99 a minute, with discounts on paid plans.

Subscriptions are published per seat, Unlimited is quoted, and services are charged by the minute. The free plan covers one user, English transcription, up to 5 files analyzed at once and 45 AI minutes a month. Essentials is $25.49 per seat per month billed annually or $29.99 monthly, for up to 3 users, with English and Spanish, 10 files at once and 5,000 AI minutes per user a month. Pro is $47.99 billed annually or $59.99 monthly, for up to 5 users, with more than 37 languages, 50 files at once, image analysis, the Clio Manage integration and 10,000 AI minutes per user a month.

Unlimited is custom, with CJIS and HIPAA controls, SSO, 500 files at once and unlimited minutes and users. Human transcription is $1.99 per minute, with 99% or better accuracy guaranteed within 12 hours.

Implementation: None published. The Unlimited plan includes a dedicated investigative workflow specialist.

Confidentiality and data terms: HIPAA compliance, with advanced privacy controls, is listed as a feature of the Unlimited plan; the security page lists HIPAA (with an asterisk) among its standards. No Business Associate Agreement is referred to on the security or pricing pages.

Note: Annual billing gives two months free. Human transcription and captions are priced per minute, with subscription discounts of 10% (Essentials) or 15% (Pro) and a custom discount on Unlimited. Transcripts formatted for legal use, court reporting and SmartDepo deposition summaries are ordered separately, outside the plan prices.

Legal Signals

What each signal means

A 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.

Confidentiality and Privilege

Client Data in Training

Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?

Permitted, in the contract

The published agreement expressly reserves a right to train on customer content, with no opt out located. Any de identification, anonymization or aggregation qualifier is recorded in the summary.

Customer content may train Rev's own models. The Terms of Service say it is analyzed by Rev's speech recognition and other AI models and may be used for their continuous training, and describe those models as proprietary, kept in house and not shared. Customer content will not be used to train generative AI models, and the security page says third party models are never trained on it. No way to opt out is published.

Source: Vendor Publishedmay be used for continuous training of those modelsAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence

Prompt and Output Retention

How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?

Disclosed without a period

Retention is acknowledged in public materials with no stated period.

The Terms of Service let Rev set general practices and limits, including the maximum period it keeps customer content, without stating that period. The Privacy Policy keeps personal data as long as necessary and keeps backups longer. No retention period or customer deletion setting is published.

Source: Vendor Publishedthe maximum period that we will retain Customer ContentAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence

Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation

Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?

Own model, documented

The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.

Access is set in Rev's own permission model, maintained by the customer: sharing permissions set per file or per workspace, invitation or link access only, and domain claiming to control which users belong to an account. Nothing describes inheriting permissions from a case or document management system.

Source: Vendor Publishedpermissions set file-by-file or at the workspace levelAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence

Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice

If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?

Notice committed

Terms commit to notice where lawfully permitted. No transparency report located.

The Terms of Service say that if either party receives a subpoena, document request, court order or government demand for the other's confidential information, it will give prompt written notice so the request can be challenged or limited. No transparency report is published.

Source: Vendor Publishedthe recipient will give prompt written notice to the other partyAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence
Accuracy and Authority

Primary Law Corpus Provenance

Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?

Not addressed

No located public material identifies the corpus behind the product’s answers.

Rev works only on the files a customer uploads and does not answer from a body of law, so no legal corpus is involved.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Sep 22, 2026

Good Law Verification

Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.

Citations point to timestamps and pages in the customer's own files, and nothing addresses checking legal authority for later treatment.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Sep 22, 2026

Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior

What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.

Findings are said to come only from uploaded files rather than a model's best guess, and nothing describes what the product does when the files do not answer a question.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Sep 22, 2026

Fabricated Citation Record

Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?

None located

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 kept by Damien Charlotin holds no entry naming Rev.com or Rev AI. Every finding the platform produces is cited to a timestamp or page and line in the customer's own files.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Nov 9, 2026Evidence
Professional Responsibility

Bar Guidance Alignment

Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?

Not addressed

No located public material engages with bar or ethics guidance.

No material on the home, law firm, security or About pages, in the Terms of Service or in the Privacy Policy engages with lawyers' professional or ethical obligations or names any ethics opinion.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Sep 22, 2026

Billing and Fee Posture

Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?

Savings claims only

Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.

Large time savings are claimed, such as up to 30 hours of case preparation saved and drafting time cut by 97% in one case study. Nothing addresses how AI assisted work is reflected in what a client is billed.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence

Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness

Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?

Not addressed

No located public material supports a client side disclosure obligation.

The security page says a SOC 3 report is available for review. No subprocessor or model provider list or disclosure material for clients is published on the security page, in the Terms of Service or in the Privacy Policy.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Sep 22, 2026

Court Disclosure Support

If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?

Partial record

Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.

Each finding traces to its source timestamp or page and line, and legal transcripts verified by people are available. No record of which model produced an analysis or draft, and no export of AI use for disclosure to a court, is described.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Sep 22, 2026Evidence
Contact

Correct a record, or ask how something was graded

Every grade and every signal on this index is drawn from public sources and dated. If a record is wrong, out of date, or missing an artifact the index did not locate, send the source and it will be reviewed and the record redated. Vendors are welcome to submit documentation. Nothing on this index is for sale, including a listing, a placement, or a grade.

AI Legal Index

The AI Legal Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in legal. It holds 465 vendors across 9 categories, each graded on the same 15 capability axes and recorded against 12 legal signals, from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
November 10, 2026
The AI Legal Index is an editorial reference. It is not a regulatory body, not a law firm, and nothing published here is legal advice or a recommendation to retain or avoid a vendor. Records are verified against published sources, bar guidance and public court records. Where a record reads not addressed, the material was not located in public sources on the date shown. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Legal Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746