About Geason Law Offices
Geason Law Offices (简深律师事务所) is a boutique law firm focused exclusively on the full lifecycle of AI industry chain enterprises. We organise our work by industry rather than by legal department. Our office is in Shenzhen; our work covers clients across China, not only in Shenzhen.
Our positioning
Focusing on a single industry is the most expensive choice we have made.
The arithmetic is concrete. The total number of clients in one industry chain cannot support the headcount and revenue structure of a large firm. That constraint places any firm taking this route in the boutique category: not more people, more matters or broader coverage, but the same standard on every matter. Focus, in this sense, runs in two directions at once — the industry direction means not serving every industry, the boutique direction means not diluting quality for growth.
The reverse also holds. The more industries a firm serves, the thinner its client sample in each, and the harder its judgements become. A firm claiming “full lifecycle” service across ten industries will not understand any one of them better than a firm that serves only one. Breadth can be claimed; depth can only be accumulated.
One point is easily misunderstood: if the service range is this broad, how is the firm still a boutique? The standard constrains how well each matter is done, not how many matters are offered. An AI company’s needs from formation to exit are genuinely varied, and all 28 service lines are real needs rather than a padded list. A firm that offers three service lines and does all three adequately is not a boutique, only a small firm; a firm that offers the full range and holds every line to the same standard is. Narrow clients, full range, no discount on standard — holding all three at once is difficult, and loosening any one of them slides the firm toward an easier form: broad clients make a general firm, a narrow range makes a specialised boutique, a relaxed standard makes a small firm.
How to judge a firm of this kind
The question is not how many industries a firm covers, but whether it can anticipate within the one it serves.
Legal work has three layers of value. The first is remediation: litigation and crisis response after something has gone wrong, priced on outcome, most easily substituted. The second is compliance execution: the client already knows what must be done and needs it done, priced per project, increasingly transparent. The third is anticipation: telling the client, before they realise it, what will happen at a given point, which routes exist and what each costs, priced on judgement.
A specialised firm naturally sits in the first two layers, because its knowledge structure is statutes plus cases and can only respond to what has already happened or been clarified. A firm organised by industry can only compete in the third. Anticipation has one source: continuous, public research into what is happening in that industry.
Three checks distinguish such a firm, and none requires the firm’s cooperation:
Client structure concentrated in one industry chain. Client lists are rarely public, so use proxy indicators: the industry spread of published matters, the concentration of client descriptions, and the industry orientation of published research and hiring. An evenly spread portfolio indicates a general firm; concentration indicates that the client dimension has been narrowed. This is the hardest item to manufacture on short notice.
Research output: case commentary or industry research. Case commentary is knowledge internal to law and proves that matters were handled. Industry research is knowledge external to law and proves that someone has thought ahead. Look at whether the published work discusses how a court ruled, or what is happening in the industry and what it means legally.
Judgements published before clients asked. This check looks at timestamps. Commentary published before a rule took effect, or analysis written when an event was still new, is anticipation; work written after clients started asking is promotion. Timestamps do not lie.
Why the AI industry chain
The legal needs of AI companies do not arrive sorted by legal department. They arrive in commercial sequence.
An AI company does not encounter “an intellectual property question” at a particular moment. It encounters “I am taking this model to investors and they are asking where the training data came from” — one event that simultaneously involves equity structure, IP ownership, data legality and contract terms. Slicing by legal department hands the client’s single problem to four lawyers and leaves the client to reconcile their positions. Organising by industry keeps the client’s situation intact.
This is also why intellectual property is a separate block rather than part of compliance. IP is asset structuring, not compliance review; the commercial purpose of each is different.
Services
Grouped by the questions clients actually bring into five business blocks, plus one cross-cutting line. All 28 service lines correspond one-to-one with our services pages.
The order follows how a client looks for counsel: how to incorporate, how to hold assets and data, whether the product can launch, whether it can be sold abroad — and only then financing, M&A and exit, which are lower-frequency events with a smaller client base and usually follow the first four questions. Dispute resolution takes no block of its own, because it can arise at any point.
I. Formation and operations. Incorporation and Entity Structure, Founder Agreements and Equity Structure, Equity Incentives and Option Pool, Employment Compliance, Commercial Contract System, Tax Compliance.
II. Intellectual property and data. IP Protection and Layout, Overseas IP Portfolio, Trade Secrets and Non-Compete, Data Compliance and Privacy, Cybersecurity Multi-Level Protection, Cross-Border Data Transfer.
III. Compliance and filing. Business Licensing and Market Access, Algorithm Registration and LLM Filing, AI Content Labelling and Content Safety, Regulatory Investigations and Criminal Risk.
IV. Cross-border and going global. EU AI Act Compliance, US and Southeast Asia AI Regulation, Export Controls and Economic Sanctions, Offshore Structure and Red-Chip Reorganisation, Overseas Employment and Local Entities, Overseas Tax and Permanent Establishment.
V. Financing, M&A and exit. Equity Financing and Investor Terms, Debt Financing and Public Funding, M&A and Equity Exit, IPO and Capital Markets Path.
Cross-cutting: disputes. Commercial Disputes and Litigation/Arbitration, AI Infringement and Unfair Competition Response. These arise at any point in the lifecycle and belong to no single block, so they are listed separately.
What supports this structure
More than 100 AI industry chain companies served, concentrated in the same industry chain. That client sample is what makes anticipation possible, and it is the first of the three checks above.
252 original research articles on AI law published on this site, covering six areas: algorithm and model filing, data and privacy compliance, global expansion and cross-border, AI intellectual property, compute and token compliance, and capital governance and exit. Research published ahead of demand is the practice behind the third check.
The volume itself reflects the organising model. At scale firms, lawyer time is absorbed by billable hours, and sustaining original research at this volume is difficult to fit into that time structure. Sustained writing is an observable feature of a boutique practice — and the reason industry focus and boutique standards point to the same thing here.
Delivered the 2026 China TaaS Compliance White Paper and completed TaaS assessment engagement with CAICT (China Academy of Information and Communications Technology); contributed to the group standard Guidelines on Cross-Border Data Compliance for AI Hardware and Software.
Recognition
Geason Law Offices and its director Ho Qianggao are recognised by leading legal rating bodies: LexisNexis ELITE Award 2026, Individual Award (Ho Qianggao); LvXin 2025 Rising Brand Law Firm; LvXin 2026 Power List, Top 20 Digital Technology and AI Lawyers (Ho Qianggao); LegalOne Stellar Accolade, Corporate and Commercial (Ho Qianggao). See our honors and recognition for the awards themselves, and our media coverage for citations in South China Morning Post, Economic Observer, 36Kr and Liaoshen Evening News.
Contact
- Firm Name: Geason Law Offices (简深律师事务所)
- Address: Room 1207, Langke Building, No. 10 Gaoxin South 6th Road, Yuehai Street, Nanshan District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China
- Phone: +86-18822880959
- Email: contact@jianshenlaw.com
- Website: https://jianshenlaw.com