kCura Relativity Reviews

We use Relativity to code documents for their responsiveness, privilege, private information, confidentiality, and so on. We use it to categorize our documents into different categories depending on the client's instructions.

In my previous organization, I used a previous version. Relativity got updated, and now I use a newer version. So I don't think any changes should be made or anything should be suggested.

The analytics and data visualization tools supported the case assessment.

It gives a very clear view. After we code documents on Relativity, we get a very transparent view of how many responsive and non-responsive documents we have categorized. Relativity gives us transparency.

I found Relativity very useful because it's easy to categorize documents. If you get more complex litigation, like around 500,000 or 1,000,000 documents, it's easier to categorize them in Relativity. So, it's a more powerful tool for reviewing documents.

I haven't faced any problems using Relativity yet. I found it very useful.

I haven't seen anything on AI merging with Relativity.

I have been using it for more than a year. 

Sometimes, it breaks down. Sometimes, there are crashes in Relativity. It's not 100% perfect. For example, when we use more complex documents, like a big pool of 500,000 or 1,000,000 documents, sometimes Relativity crashes. Or if a particular document is in PDF form and contains more than 10,000 or 12,000 pages, it takes a little time to load.

If I want to add users to Relativity, I'm able to do that. 400 to 500 people use it. In my last organization, it was around 1,000 people.

I haven't reached out to Relativity support. We report to our company, and they send the feedback to Relativity.

I have worked on Everlaw, but mostly, I've worked on Relativity for document review and Canopy for data breaches.

I used it for about two weeks on one project.

Relativity is a useful tool for these types of litigation matters. We (my company) get different types of litigation matters. Sometimes we get data breach matters, so we use Canopy for that because Canopy is best for data breaches. For these litigation matters, Relativity is the best.

I don't think it's difficult. It's just about practice. If someone uses it for a while, like a week or two, they will know how to use the tool.

It's worth the money.

It's expensive for an individual, but for a company, it's not expensive. And for an individual, I believe it's of no use.

I would tell others to learn the basics first, like how to make documents, how to categorize documents on Relativity, how to use search terms, and how to make different tools for coding documents.

It is easy for a beginner to learn to use Relativity. 

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

We were a new discovery vendor so we created cases for attorneys and firms to review discoveries and then create productions. 

The solution has great searching capabilities, and it's very reliable. There are a lot of ways to QC your work and save your searches, and we had really good case support from the Relativity team.

Some of the training materials online are not too straightforward, but out of the discovery review platforms I've worked with, this one is the best. This seems to be a general issue for most eDiscovery platforms, which is understandable since there is so much ground to cover.

I used this solution for about a year. 

The stability was really great. I think there were maybe one or two times where there was a site-wide issue, but Relativity was very quick to email us to let us know, and then address and resolve it.

It is scalable. I saw it work with hundreds of thousands of documents at one time in some workspaces, and I was very impressed with it. 

I had to reach out to tech support a few times, and they were really great. They were very responsive and had very thorough responses.

Positive

I'm now using Intella. It's about a tenth of the price of Relativity, so that's a big difference. Intella is originally a forensic software that has review capabilities, so it's not as extensive. I definitely miss working with Relativity.

Our legal technology department handled the set up and implementation. They did workspace creation, template creations, and customization. The maintenance was entirely supported by the Relativity staff.

The cost is based on a per gigabyte pricing for hosting. When I was using the solution, they had a user fee, which I believe was about $80 per month, but it varies depending on what vendor you use. I know that they are transitioning off of that pricing model. They are maintaining the per gigabyte pricing, and it's based on tiers of how much data you host with them. The more data you host, the lower the per gigabyte cost.

It depends on what you need. If you're a law firm and you have a lot of cases, then RelativityOne might be something to look into. If you're a small business and you're really focusing on small-level reviews, then there might be cheaper options for you. I think RelativityOne, because it is so powerful, can be very difficult to use and there's a lot that can go wrong if you don't know how to use it. In order to get the most out of your subscription, I would definitely recommend having someone who has had experience with it and knows how to work the program if you decide to make the investment. Alternatively, budget for some of the Relativity training classes.

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten. 

Our primary use case for this solution is for document review and production. Our environment involves managing large volumes of legal documents that require thorough analysis and organization.

The product's most valuable features include robust search capabilities, advanced analytics, and email threading.

The platform's integration of advanced AI features could further enhance its capabilities. As AI technology evolves, incorporating it into our document review processes could provide additional benefits and efficiencies.

We have been using kCura Relativity for the past ten years.

The product stability seems fine.

In our experience, the product scalability has been generally satisfactory, though issues can arise from the service provider's end.

The initial setup was relatively straightforward. Over the years, our team has become well-acquainted with the interface, making the transition smooth. New users also find the setup process easy to follow. Given our long-term use of the solution, the familiarity and comfort level with the system contribute to its ease of use. I have not received any significant complaints regarding the interactivity of the setup, indicating that it meets our needs effectively.

Users are typically charged a fee per user account and a separate fee based on the amount of data processed and hosted.

kCura's analytic tools have greatly impacted our case strategy by allowing us to efficiently identify the most relevant documents and filter out non-relevant ones.

It has kept up with changes in legal requirements and data privacy laws, maintaining a strong presence in the market. Its widespread adoption makes working with other counsel easier and allows for the exchange of productions electronically.

I recommend it to others and rate it an eight out of ten.

We use kCura Relativity to deliver client projects.

kCura Relativity is easy to use, and it is reliable.

They require more built-in support for some third-party applications.

I have been working with kCura Relativity for three years. 

They are no longer known as kCura.

We have used many different versions across the years, but we are currently using version 11.

11 is the most recent version that is not cloud-based. They also have a cloud version, which is a separate version.

kCura Relativity is a stable solution.

kCura Relativity is scalable.

We have 200 users in our company who use this solution.

Their support is really good.

I wasn't involved in the initials setup, but it also depends on how you define easy.

The pricing is extremely complicated. There is no one-word answer, I would need more specifics.

My advice to others would be to make use of their support.

There are numerous things they must check and consider before using it.

I would rate kCura Relativity an eight out of ten.

When we have larger cases with more than a terabyte of data, kCura Relativity is the best resource.

I like Relativity's blackout feature, as well as the Case Dynamics function.

What I dislike about Relativity is that we have to go through the host in order to do productions and loads. It is not a do-it-yourself tool.

I have been working with kCura Relativity for the last 12 months.

We are currently working with the most recent version.

Definitely, kCura Relativity is stable.

Unquestionably, kCura Relativity is a scalable solution.

We have eight users in our firm that use Relativity.

Everyone seems to agree that the amount of data flowing through any type of business will only increase over the next two to five years.

Having said that, if we get more data in the next two to five years, we'll use Relativity more frequently than we do now. I do expect to use it more frequently.

Technical support has been fine.

I have over a decade of experience in e-discovery. I've spent a significant amount of time working on a variety of platforms.

In my opinion, Recommind Axcelerate eDiscovery is a bit dated. I wouldn't recommend it in my top 10.

From my personal experience, they are somewhat antiquated platforms. I formed a focus group less than a year ago to evaluate various e-discovery platforms, and we heavily relied on the 2021 e-discovery survey and the G2 reporting standards.

We didn't think any of the platforms mentioned were worth our time because they didn't meet some of the criteria we were looking for in an e-discovery platform.

Let me give you an example. Nowadays, a large amount of electronic data contains PII, and we were looking for a tool that could redact instances of PII globally and with some flexibility. Another example is the CaseMap functionality. We would like to be able to take our documents, put them together with witnesses, facts and create a timeline and demonstrative items to prepare for hearings and depositions. Those are two of the top two functions that I couldn't find in the tools that were mentioned.

In the last 12 months, I have used iCONECT, Relativity, Epiq Discovery, which is a proprietary tool hosted by Epiq. I've also used Eclipse and Lexbe.

I have also had a chance to explore Everlaw as well as DISCO.

The initial setup was seamless.

We performed a six-week rollout.

We have one project manager and five specialists supporting him in maintaining this solution.

We had project managers in-house and through the vendor.

I work as a litigation support manager. I provide attorneys with technologies that will enhance their practice. I work for a law firm with approximately 240 attorneys.

I would recommend that they look at a variety of platforms and have a checklist prepared in advance and have a thorough understanding of the product limitations versus your needs.

I would rate kCura Relativity an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for litigation and discovery matters to review. We host the data. We are using it to process the source of the data for review by other users. I don't actually review the documents myself.

It's definitely a useful tool for more robust-sized cases.

The searching capability of the product is definitely very valuable to our organization. 

The accessibility is excellent.

The ease of navigation from dock to dock, and that kind of usability, is quite helpful.

The stability has been very good over the years.

The price per user could be improved. We'd like for it to be more affordable. 

I've been working with the solution personally for the last five or so years. It's been a while. 

The stability is excellent and the performance is very reliable. In the years I've used it, I only ran into maybe one incident of it having access issues. That's very good in my opinion. I'm quite satisfied with it in that sense. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. 

I'm not sure how many users are actually using it in our organization.

We do not have plans to increase usage at this time. We're pretty happy with where we are. 

I can't speak to what was used previously, although it is possible there was something else in the past. The company has been around for a very long time. I'm sure that there probably was another solution, however, the specifications on exactly what it was I don't have knowledge of.

I cannot recall the deployment process. I don't have any information in terms of how long it took to actually implement.

We don't have anyone on our end that is assigned to maintaining the product.

I don't have exact numbers. I would assume we likely see an ROI or we probably wouldn't still be hosting it or dealing with it. That said, I don't have access to the exact data.

You are charged per user. It can get pretty expensive if you have a lot of users in your organization. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using or the deployment method.

For Relativity specifically, it is more of a tool for large cases. If you have, more often than not, a caseload that is small, you're going to be producing PDF formats and stuff like that, and Relativity is probably more than what you would need. I would advise those considering the solution to definitely take a look at what types of cases they have and if the company doesn't have large data sets and format expectation of standards deliveries, then it's probably not something that it would need.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're mostly quite happy with its capabilities.

We are currently creating a product that is dependent on the Relativity API from the development side, using APIs to do e-discovery or reports on documents that are being reviewed and managed in Relativity. We base our product and the communication on our test servers and gather the information to determine its reviews and other metadata. We use that information to generate additional and more improved APIs. Our clients are wanting to use the docker installation of our product on their own servers. 

We have based and organized our product to fullfill the Relativity Development Requirements. 

The most valuable feature from my perspective are the Kepler. It's a component that is more technical and directly related to the development companies that will be using it. It allows you to create custom APIs. You can communicate and gather most of the information that is not available in the standard API that they offer. This feature adds to that as a positive component, enabling you to create your custom APIs.

I think there is a lot of room for improvement because we have encountered a lot of bugs especially on the development side. I think they are working hard at trying to improve this for the future.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

This is a stable product. Sometimes their services don't work correctly and processing requests can be difficult. There are some things that need to be improved in the stability but I think they already know this and they are working towards fixing it. 

The solution is scalable and allows you to expand the service in different servers and nodes but if you are using an older version, then it creates load balancer issues with development partners. We currently have around 10 to 12 developers and QA working on our product with Relativity.

Technical support is very helpful when they engage. A lot has changed with Covid, so staff are working from home. I'd be happier if they were responding more quickly, particularly on major issues. In general, their communication is perfect and they do what they can to help. There is a time difference between Albania and where they are, it's around five or six hours, and that also creates delayed responses. If you install the product when they're not around, you might have to wait several hours.

The initial setup was very difficult. If you're not trained, you need a lot of support from them. But things have improved with the setup although it is still quite difficult. We needed assistance from support because of the complexity. They now offer training or certification for administration, and this is something worth considering before installing. There are different parts to the deployment but it can generally be done in one day, perhaps a little more. 

Currently we have a development partnership license.

We're learning every day, exploring it as we go. There is a lot of information that's not available in the documentation and not explained, so I would recommend going with the certification. We came across issues that we didn't know about previously and the support was unable to solve because there are parts that they hadn't explored yet. Sometimes Relativity hasn't had experience with the issues that have come to the surface so it's better to have the certification.

They're constantly trying to improve the product so I would rate it an eight out of 10.