VirtualTerms - B2B agreements done 10x faster—no lawyers, no headaches

@arthur_swanson The product clearly knows its audience. Amazing.

@ali09 Thanks for your interest in VirtualTerms. Currently, it is bilateral with two party signatories. You can forward for review to additional parties, but only two signing parties. But it is a feature for the roadmap to support additional parties signing. Let me know if you have other questions or would like any help with it.

@ben09 Thanks for your interest in VirtualTerms. Currently, it does not have any integrations. We are in Beta testing the base features for users. But certainly that's on our mind for the roadmap. Would love to understand more about your thoughts on the importance of integrations.

@noahno4 Thanks your interest in VirtualTerms and love for the concept. It's my mission to make legal agreements easier. Yes, you can add jurisdiction specific clauses or clauses you want to add for your particular agreement or situation. It's easy. You can either: (a) edit the particular section of the key terms that applies, or (b) just drop in your additional clause to the Additional Terms section. Let me know if you have other questions or need some help trying it out. We also have an AI Assistant in the lower right corner to help guide you, answer questions, and explain/summarize. It's in beta, so would love feedback after using it.

@freddie_leo Yes, our streamlined NDA form is included. It's literally one page with a few key points you review with the rest linking to our standardized NDA terms. Takes seconds to create and review and seconds for your counterparty to review.

@abigail_phillips2 It's not an app yet, but mobile friendly. With NDAs, given how short and simple our streamlined key terms are, it works really well on mobile. With consulting and other agreements, though our key terms and UI are really streamlined, it may display a little better on a laptop or desktop. But try it on mobile and let us know what you think. We will be working to improve it.

@paul_george7 Thanks! Yes, shortening deal cycles is what its all about. I've seen agreements drag on for months and months, frustrating everyone involved. As for version control, since we are in early beta, we have limited features around that. Right now, the application does not allow the recipient to make direct edits. They can only comment. That is intentional. For two reasons: (1) We want to avoid the temptation to nit pick and over edit by providing track change type capability, and (2) we want the sender to control the document at this point (the back and forth via Word document editing via email is part of the problem we are trying to solve, so we don't necessarily want to encourage it!). We will likely add some sort of enhanced commenting/editing features in the roadmap - maybe for users that need to upgrade to that level of functionality. Let me know if you have other thoughts or questions. Love the feedback and happy to help early users getting going.

@amelia_smith19 Thanks for your interest! We aim to be easy to use but have a level of tailoring and control to modify your agreements if necessary. I like to say we are creating good UI/UX for legal agreements. As for version control, you can create a template or form to reuse, but edit it for particular agreements and situations. You can edit and save over the prior version or save it as a new version. Right now, the other party can't edit, but they can comment. That way you stay in control of the document, and encourage them to be limited in comment (rather than wholesale editing). We think for most users and situations that will work well, but will be looking at additional comment/versioning functionality in the roadmap.

@brooklyn_campbell Thanks! Our agreements have been designed by legal experts with decades experience supporting businesses, large and small. We currently have NDAs, consulting agreements, and independent contractor agreements aimed at consultants, fractionals, freelancers, and service providers. However, we're actively developing additional agreements, including other services agreements aimed at marketing agencies and development shops and more. Stay tuned for updates as we expand our offerings, but please let us know what agreements you'd like to see.

@jude_gray Thanks! Even though I'm a lawyer, I understand why its challenging for SMBs to involve one in each and every agreement. As for security, we take security very seriously, and employ industry-standard security measures to protect your information.

@victoria_anderson5 Thanks! Yes, it has NDAs and consulting/contractor agreements. Those can easily be adapted into other types of services agreements (they are largely the same with different names and a few additional provisions depending on the type). We plan on adding more based on user needs and feedback, so let us know what you're interested in.

@nathaniel_cook2 Thanks so much. It's focused on U.S. agreements right now (or, at least where one party is U.S. based). We will look at what we need to do to modify things to work for other jurisdictions, but needed to start with a large, primary market first.

@matteo_rider Thanks for your interest! First, the key terms are designed to provide both parties focus and clarity. They are also done in more "Plain English", so that you can understand without having to parse through all of the legalese. Those key terms then like to our standardized, online "VirtualTerms." These are designed to be party neutral and common, market terms. We tried to design it so that all the most important legal and business stuff is in the couple of pages of the key term sheet (no hiding the gothcas in the long terms). They are also written in Plain English in a FAQ style format. But you can also use our AI Assistant for explanations and summaries. But if you have a lawyer review it, it's also done in a way to make that review faster and easier to save you time and money.

@graham_weaver Thanks! Right now, the recipient signs first. Then it goes to the sender (or the sender's designated signer).

@faisal_iftikhar Not yet. But its part of the roadmap depending on customer feedback.

@scytalelabs_marketing The key terms include indemnity and limitations of liability. What the platform does is provide default selections for each of those (and a few other provisions) based on whether you selected that you are the customer or service provider. For example, if you are the service provider, it would automatically default to include a limitation of liability limited to the fees paid to you in the last 12 months. But you can select other drop down options (such as specifying a particular $ limit or limiting liability to total fees paid), and you can fully edit the text if you need something further. You can also decide to include certain exceptions to the limitations of liability (by default, as the service provider, this is not included)(but if you are the customer, you might want to carve out, say, the service provider's violation of law). So you can always tailor things to your needs, preferences, risk tolerance, and negotiations. But we provide a very clean, easy way to identify the key issues, provide fairly "market" default options, and an easy way to modify them. Happy to explain more and help you get started.

@kshitij_mishra4 Thanks! We will.