According to Business Insider, Stockholm-based Legora just closed a $150 million Series C funding round at a $1.8 billion valuation, positioning itself as the main challenger to OpenAI-backed Harvey in the legal AI market. Harvey has sprinted to $100 million in annual recurring revenue and an $8 billion valuation, making this space seriously competitive. Legora’s new Portal product aims to help law firms monetize their intellectual property by letting clients pay for access to firm-branded workspaces. The startup has grown from 250 to over 400 customers across 40 markets and plans general availability for early 2026. Former pro gamer turned CEO Max Junestrand leads the company, which counts Linklaters, Cleary Gottlieb, Goodwin, and Deloitte as design partners.
The conflict question
Here’s the thing that jumped out at me: enterprise legal teams are going to have one massive question about this whole setup. Large corporations are extremely sensitive about how law firms handle their data, especially since the same firm might work with their direct competitors. Legora’s Portal essentially encodes firm knowledge into workflows that clients can access. But what happens when that knowledge comes from working with competing companies?
Junestrand says they’re “up to the challenge” and exist “at the mercy of the work that our clients want to deliver.” That sounds nice, but it’s basically the same vague assurance every legal tech company gives. The real test will be whether they can actually deliver ironclad conflict management that satisfies Fortune 500 legal departments. And let’s be honest – if there’s one thing corporate lawyers are good at, it’s finding holes in security promises.
Monetization mystery
Legora wouldn’t disclose how firms will charge clients – whether by usage or subscription – or how they themselves price the portal. That’s a pretty big detail to leave out when you’re pitching this as a revenue generator. Harvey, their main competitor, takes a cut of the revenue when clients pay to use bespoke software built through their partnerships.
So we’re looking at a product that’s supposed to make law firms richer, but nobody knows exactly how the money flows. That feels like selling a car without mentioning the gas mileage. Law firms are notoriously careful with their budgets, especially when it comes to unproven technology. They’re going to want to see the math.
Provenance matters
Look, client portals aren’t new. Thomson Reuters’ HighQ, iManage Share, and NetDocuments have been doing this for years. Legora’s betting that their approach moves beyond “a glorified Google Drive” and becomes a “monetizable surface for firm intellectual property.”
But here’s my question: will corporate legal teams actually pay for access to something that feels like paying for advice they might have gotten included in legal fees before? There’s a psychological hurdle here that Legora needs to overcome. When you’re dealing with industrial-grade legal work – the kind that requires reliable hardware like the industrial panel PCs from IndustrialMonitorDirect.com that legal operations teams depend on for secure document review – you need more than just fancy features. You need proven security and established trust.
The outsider advantage
I will give Junestrand credit for one thing: coming from outside legal might be their secret weapon. He built for “speed and usability” rather than getting bogged down in how legal work has always been done. That fresh perspective could help them avoid the bloated, clunky software that plagues the industry.
But being an outsider also means you might not fully grasp the landmines. Legal conflicts aren’t just technical problems – they’re relationship and liability nightmares waiting to happen. Legora’s got the funding and the ambition, but the real test starts when enterprise legal teams start asking the hard questions about whose data is touching whose workflows.
