Technical substance
What does the system, platform or AI solution actually consist of, and which parts are proprietary, external, manual or dependent on third parties?
Technology & AI Integrity Advisory
When technology and AI must hold up to real decisions.
AI Advisor helps investors, advisers and companies review whether software, AI systems and technology vendors can support the decisions they are meant to underpin: investments, procurement, contracts and board decisions. The analysis focuses on technical substance, control, security, documentation, dependencies and commercial defensibility.
Value does not lie only in the technology, but in what can be substantiated.
Software and AI are often central assets. But before an investment, procurement process or transaction, it is not enough that the technology works or that the vendor describes it convincingly. It must be possible to understand what has actually been built, who controls it, which rights and dependencies exist, how data is used and which risks follow from the decision.
Integrity here means whether the technology’s claimed value, control, security and risk profile can be substantiated.
Rights, control and transferability
Is there a rights chain, IP control, licence structure and practical ability to use, transfer, integrate or further develop the technology?
Data, security and dependencies
Which data flows, vendors, cloud services, APIs, open source components and security risks does the solution carry?
Decision material
What do the findings mean for terms, procurement, board decisions, risk acceptance, remedial actions or the need for deeper review?
Services
Five review tracks
For decisions where technology affects value, responsibility and risk.
Technology and Asset Review
For investments, acquisitions and licensing where software or technology carries a central part of the value.
Supplier Review
For procurement and supplier onboarding where a SaaS, AI or technology dependency needs to be reviewed before decision.
AI Governance Review
For actual AI use, AI claims, responsibility, documentation and regulatory exposure.
Legal and Transaction DD Support
For law firms and transaction teams when technology, AI, data, IP or security are central to the deal.
Legal Debt in Technology and AI Environments
For companies where legal gaps or control weaknesses have accumulated around software, AI, data, suppliers, contracts or rapid technology development.
For whom
Law firms
Specialist support in legal DD, technology transactions, IT/AI agreements, IP, data and vendor-related issues.
Investors and buyers
Review of whether the technology’s value assumptions hold before investment, acquisition or strategic partnership.
Companies buying technology
Vendor review before SaaS, AI or technology procurement, with focus on control, data, security, exit and contractual risk.
Management and boards
Decision material before AI adoption, major technology dependencies, outsourcing, platform change or sensitive regulatory decisions.
Structured review, not general advice.
The method shows how AI Advisor moves from decision context and material to analysis, risk assessment and decision-ready reporting. Claims about technology, AI, data, security and rights are tested before the decision, and findings are translated into concrete decision points.
About AI Advisor
AI Advisor is run by Sofia Scherman, business lawyer, former attorney and former Chief Legal Officer in the technology sector. The practice builds on experience in commercial contracts, SaaS, data protection, AI governance, regulatory analysis and technology-related decision support.
The review combines legal analysis, technical understanding and commercial risk assessment. Where an engagement requires deeper technical verification, the work can be supplemented with specialist competence in areas such as architecture, security, code, open source or AI/ML.
The first step is a conversation.
Most engagements begin with a short and confidential conversation to establish the decision context, the role of the technology, available material and the appropriate review level. Scope and review level are then proposed as: red flag review, integrity review or deeper review.