What is our primary use case?
Logikcull is a new age technology tool for projects involving litigation support, which will be eDiscovery related projects where the main functionalities of the tool being uploading data, searching, processing, and then downloading it to a reviewer friendly format, which can be used for producing at a court of law or for out of court settlements.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature which I found was that it was very user-friendly. It's a very new age-friendly tech for uploading the data into the software. It also has a wonderful representation of data in terms of dashboards and pivot charts, where you get your data represented in various angles and projections.
They have a very niche functionality, which just involves a simple drag and drop feature. You do not need to go through any extensive coding, or you do not need to use any subsidiary tool to upload the data into it. Unlike other industry tools, you can just use the functionality and drag and drop the data into it.
The other good and versatile feature which I found was the amount of automation involved in it. They have distributed the manual work and the manual effort on the part of the professional. It supports automatic re-duplication of data, automatic scanning of data, optical character recognition, processing, and text extraction from the document.
In contrast, in other eDiscovery tools like Relativity or Nuix, you would have to do it manually. This tool takes care of it through its versatile inbuilt function, incorporating automation. Also, no physical transportation of data is required.
You can give a specific set of permissions to specific people with credentials, and they could just upload the data into the tool using the simple drag and drop feature. No hard drives will be required, and no write blockers. You have a set of data, and you give the credentials to a certain professional who has the access and the right to upload the data, and it is done.
A final aspect which I really found very cool was that it provides very cool features like uploading a picture on social media, which is very user-friendly. You don't find it a lot with other tools.
There are also some other functionalities. For example, while processing data, some other things are taken into account, like hidden content. These are like the speaker notes and annotations, which would require extensive searching in other tools. This tool just easily reveals it.
What needs improvement?
It would be better if they could include a technology-assisted review feature, which brings artificial intelligence into the cloud and the system itself. It would be great savings in terms of time and costs as you won't have a person manually going into a dense asset of documents and doing it.
For example, the technology-assisted review is a system that has been recently introduced by a counterpart tool called Relativity, where attorneys would review a set of documents that will be eventually produced in a court of law.
They introduce artificial intelligence and machine learning in the form of a technology-assisted review. The system reads the documents that you have coded or found responsive to be produced. It finds similar documents based on the content and the structure of the document, which is basically AI incorporated into the technology.
I have found that it is actually useful for small to medium-sized firms to use on an ad-hoc basis. It's perfect for a medium-sized or small-sized firm involved in fewer litigation support processes. If you have extensive litigation projects involving many clients, you might want to go for the standard tools like Relativity.
Compared to day-to-day processes because it has the functionality of pay-as-you-go. It doesn't have an hourly system of billing, which most other tools have. When this tool was created, they wanted to break free from the market standards. If you want more features, you can pay a fee, and you can go ahead with your cases.
How are customer service and technical support?
Technical support is one of the best features of Logikcull. I was stuck with a couple of queries in my certification processes. I contacted customer support and although they are a US-based company and it was around midnight there, they were very responsive. Within five to ten minutes, they responded and within the next ten minutes, my query was resolved. Later on, I got to know that they have a very good system of customer support, which involves 24/7/365 support, which is not just chat-based, it's actually real humans involved with customer support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I worked on eDiscovery tools such as Relativity, Nuix, and Ringtail before I changed jobs. If you look at the electronic discovery industry's core functionality, all the tools perform the same functionality. Basically, what you do is upload a set of data. You get to process the data, which extracts certain data components, which you would like to reproduce in a court of law. If you look at the superficial aspect, all the three tools do an excellent job. But if you go on a deeper level and go more into your day-to-day work, certain differences start appearing in a manner in which certain features are better in some tools and certain features are better in the other tools. For example, in Relativity, one of the good things I found was the data security option, which was excellent compared to other tools. But one of the cons of Relativity, which generally some people complain about, is that it's a little difficult to set up than Nuix or Logikcull.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is fairly simple. It's mostly event-based, and it's cloud-based, and you need to have your credentials. Once you have your credentials, you could log in and perform certain functionalities, which you have access to or which you have the right to.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The cost depends on the case size of the data and the number of projects they're expecting to encounter. If it's small to medium-sized, this tool will be very good because it has a pay-as-you-go feature instead of an hourly billing rate, where they bill you every hour, and you have to go through the structure from beginning to end. If you like some features, you implement them, and if you don't like them, you don't pay for them. If you want to have additional features, you can just pay for them, and you can have them.
What other advice do I have?
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Logikcull a six.