zgbrenner turns a Mike clone into Gary, and draws hard lines around what it won't do
A rename on the surface; underneath, a deliberate stance on where a legal AI's responsibility starts and stops.
zgbrenner has stopped treating this fork as Mike with a fresh coat of paint. Rebranded as Gary, it now positions itself as a self-hostable legal AI workspace aimed squarely at U.S. solo attorneys: a plain-English setup, a matter-based workflow, eight ready-made legal tasks, and a bring-your-own-key model that plugs into the major AI providers (Anthropic, Google, OpenAI).
The part worth studying isn't the logo. It's how Gary talks about its own limits. The fork states up front that it doesn't do legal research, can produce wrong answers, and isn't bar-compliant out of the box - and it threads an "always have an attorney review this" reminder through every path where work leaves the tool. Whether or not you'd phrase it the same way, making the liability scope explicit at setup, rather than burying it in a footer, is a choice more legal products should copy.
Spotted something wrong? Or know the PR text has fresher detail than the writeup above?