Which AI Legal Assistant tier do you resell, and under whose name?

The cheapest entry point looks like the obvious starting tier, and the one above it looks like the one you actually need. That gap is the whole decision for a reseller. You are not buying a seat for your own desk; you are buying the right to put a tool in front of clients who never see the vendor's name.

Start from your delivery model instead of the feature grid. If clients never log in and only see the finished output, your question is whether the tier allows that outward use and whether your own branding can sit on it. Those two answers narrow the list before you compare anything else on the page.

Check how each tier is metered. A plan sized by usage suits a steady flow of small jobs, while the bring-your-own-key arrangement can suit partners who already hold model access and want the drafting layer on top. Which fits depends on your volume and your own supplier relationships.

Write down what a client actually receives from you: an action plan, a set of drafts, a deadline and evidence checklist, or an escalation route. Match that list against the tier you are considering. If a tier does not cover the full outcome you promised, the client relationship is exposed no matter how good the drafting is.

For most partners, the decision settles on the tier that covers client-facing delivery rather than the entry tier built for individual use. You want the arrangement where the work you produce can carry your name, because that is what your client is paying for. The lower tier rarely survives that test once client work enters the picture.

Map your workflow onto the tiers before you commit. Action plans and document drafts form the core of what you hand over, and deadline and evidence checklists are what clients rely on next. If a tier's usage terms allow you to produce and deliver those under your own brand, you have found your baseline.

The bring-your-own-key option deserves a fair look if you already operate model access and want control over that layer. It suits partners who want the drafting and planning workflow without a second provider relationship. It is a different shape of commitment, so read the terms rather than assuming it mirrors the others.

Escalation routes matter as well. When a matter outgrows a draft, your client needs a clear next step, and you need to know the tier supports producing that route. Build your reseller package around the tier that covers planning, drafting and escalation in one place, then price your service around the outcome.

The licence question outranks every feature question for a reseller. You need to know, in writing, whether the tier permits you to use the output in client work and to present it under your own name. If the terms leave that unclear, treat it as a no until you have a written answer from the publisher.

A second risk sits in the output itself. The tool produces drafts and plans, and those can be wrong for a particular jurisdiction or agency. As the party with the client relationship, you carry the consequence of a missed step or an outdated form. Build a review step into your own process rather than passing drafts straight through.

Your own liability position deserves thought too. A reseller who presents output as final advice takes on exposure the publisher never agreed to. Set expectations with clients about what they are buying: structured drafting and planning support, reviewed by a person, with a route to professional advice where the stakes are high.

Finally, check what happens to your arrangement if the underlying terms shift over the life of a lifetime tier. Ask how updates, usage limits and any white-label conditions are handled, and keep the answers on file. A partner who can show a client their terms is a partner who can survive a dispute.

Compare the tiers on three axes: who may use the output, whose name sits on it, and how volume is measured. The entry tier is sized for individual use, the middle tier widens that, and the bring-your-own-key tier changes where the model side of the arrangement sits. Put those three differences side by side before you look at anything else.

Then test each against your pipeline. If you run a small number of client matters with high review, the middle tier often fits because the drafting and checklist work is where your time goes. If you handle steady volume and hold your own model access, the key-based tier may suit the way you already buy services.

Do not overlook the workflow items when comparing. An action plan, a document draft, a deadline and evidence checklist and a mapped escalation route are the four things a client sees. A tier that supports all four in your delivery format is worth more to a reseller than one that adds features you never hand over.

Close the comparison by writing your own quote. State what the client receives, who reviews it, and what happens when the matter escalates. Then confirm the tier's terms allow every part of that promise. If one clause does not fit, change the tier rather than the promise you make to a client.