Haloo

Haloo's new Agent Analysis finds the conflicts legacy searches catch—and the ones they miss—then ranks them by likelihood of confusion and explains the legal reasoning behind each result.

The most misused term at #INTA this year is "AI native." Its use as a marketing gimmick means this industry is walking into a tsunami without a sandbag. Several companies in our space, trademark search, were on the floor this week advertising end-to-end AI native capabilities. Technology built pre-2019, still reliant on human analysts in the background. In some cases, it’s the sales team assembling the reports. That’s not end-to-end AI native. It’s an unethical rebrand of old tech as a Hail Mary. Across the industry: no AI background in the C-suite, limited technical depth in the few that have it, maybe one or two people in a headcount of hundreds who’ve actually built anything with AI. And yet, AI native everywhere you look. You can’t entirely blame them. Most aren’t plugged into the real AI ecosystem. They’re legacy operaters, without the technical advisory needed to assess AI opportunities and talent. And underneath that is a tension: adopting AI in a meaningful way often requires rethinking roles, maybe their own. Here’s what’s already happening: General Legal (YC26), founded by veterans of Cooley LLP, Fenwick & West, and Thomson Reuters’ CoCounsel team, is an AI-native law firm delivering work at a fraction of traditional cost/ turnaround - see screenshot. Moritz has supported 100+ companies closing deals representing more than $2B in value, with a four-hour avg turnaround. Manifest OS has 100 lawyers now operating in an AI-native environment. 3,000 clients served. Faster response times, better outcomes. This is not LegalZoom. This is 'Big Law' partners with decades of reputation, backed by Kleiner Perkins, Menlo Ventures, First Round Capital, building firms where AI does most of the work. If you think this isn’t coming for trademarks and patents, you are going to get caught with your pants down. Full trademark search, matching today’s gold-standard human output, will need to be instant and cheap. Renewals and docketing will require little to no human involvement. Applications will be self-drafted by clients through an AI agent at intake. This is already happening in adjacent practice areas. IP is next. OpenAI and Anthropic announced this week they are moving into enterprise software, with engineering teams going directly to the world’s largest companies to build internally. Traditional IP software will be displaced. In IP, these systems require high-fidelity, AI-ready data. Haloo’s sister company Pinakel AI is exactly that. To the private equity firms writing nine-figure checks for last-gen software: look hard at the leadership of what you’re buying. You cannot be paying EBITDA multiples on companies where nobody in the C-suite has real depth in AI. You are acquiring customers today. Those customers are about to face the biggest shift of their professional lives. Haloo is running a webinar series on what AI native actually means in IP. If you’re a law firm, software vendor, investor in this space, you’ll want to be there.

Anthropic recently released a Claude for Legal capability that includes trademark clearance functionality. Haloo tested it (we built the AI infrastructure specifically for instant comprehensive trademark clearance). Our takeaway: it tries to be transparent about its limitations, and the distinctiveness and common law are genuinely interesting, which is not surprising because web search and probabilistic language interpretation are areas where large models do well. But it is not performing trademark clearance in a way that lawyers could reliably use for legal decision-making today because it is not actually searching trademark registries in a meaningful or comprehensive way. It appears to rely primarily on legal and case law datasets such as CourtListener and Descrybe. Both are excellent legal research resources. Neither is a trademark registry. Any experienced trademark lawyer or in-house counsel will recognize that immediately. The concern is that a less experienced or lay user may not. Claude refers to the process as a “knockout search,” but it is not. That creates a real risk of users believing meaningful clearance has occurred when critical registry conflicts may never have been searched at all. One commenter suggested: “Just build MCP servers to connect LLMs to trademark registry data.” But from the perspective of people who have actually spent years building this infrastructure, that “gap” is the entire problem. Trademark clearance is fundamentally a computational retrieval and data infrastructure problem. In practice, a single trademark clearance search may require retrieving and evaluating hundreds of millions of trademark records across jurisdictions while applying deterministic logic around phonetics, conceptual similarity, coordinated classes, goods/services overlap, and likelihood-of-confusion standards. You cannot simply connect an LLM to trademark registry data and expect accurate trademark clearance. The model cannot reason across hundreds of millions of live records directly. The token requirements/ computational cost would be absurd, and the latency would make the system unusable in practice. Not to mention accuracy issues, and there’s a VERY high bar for accuracy in trademarks. Even today, during a live evaluation with a large global brand, we ran a side-by-side comparison between their traditional human analyst-prepared Clarivate report and Haloo’s computational deterministic retrieval engine with instant likelihood-of-confusion analysis layered on top. Haloo surfaced roughly 10–15 materially relevant USPTO references that were not included in the Clarivate report. In other words: 10–15 actual legal risks the human analyst missed. Even though Claude can't perform in this function, it's clear Anthropic believes trademarks are a meaningful AI category. So do we ;) #LegalTech #AInative #TrademarkLaw #ClaudeAI #AIInfrastructure #IP #Trademarkdata Pinakel AI

In early client discovery, while scoping Haloo's search and watch technology, the first question lawyers asked us: "Will your search and watch integrate with my docketing system?" That question kept coming up. Again and again. It became a repetitive ask on the customer wish list. When we started seriously looking at docketing, we realized quickly: you can't build it for an AI-native practice on top of fragmented, unreliable third-party data - missing records, incorrect status, constant human verification to catch what the data had wrong. So we didn’t. Instead, a few members of our team spun out a dedicated data company Pinakel AI. Two years later, we now have exclusive coverage across >190 jurisdictions, built to match actual IPO records with the highest level of integrity. That foundation made it possible to finally build the docketing system we had originally imagined. 👇 Here’s an early look. Much more coming over the next couple of months! See it live at #INTA, Booth 1121 at ExCeL — or register to ride the Haloo bus to learn more: https://lnkd.in/dHsKx5YH #IPMS #AInative

Is this name taken? Who else is using it? Is it diluted? These aren't complicated questions. Getting answers across every global IP registry shouldn't be either. Haloo Lookup. Ask in plain language, get answers fast. Find us at #INTA, Booth 1121 at ExCeL — or register to ride the Haloo bus to learn more: https://lnkd.in/dHsKx5YH

Clients aren't waiting two days for a trademark search anymore. And they're not paying $2,000 for one either. AI-native changed the math. Flat fees. Same-day answers. And if your firm isn't offering that, the next one will. Haloo is the only vendor built for the AI-native future of trademark practice. Find us at #INTA, Booth 1121 at ExCeL — or register to ride the Haloo bus to learn more: https://lnkd.in/dHsKx5YH