* Has the college applications process become a monopoly? There’s an antitrust lawsuit contending it is. Maybe somebody will make the same sort of claim about the law school applications process with all its major security concerns. [Reuters]
* The latest traffic stats for blogs edited by law professors. It’s good to see Brian Leiter wasn’t just wrong about being more popular than ATL — he was really, really wrong. [TaxProf Blog]
* Goldieblox paid the Beastie Boys (or technically charity) $1 million over using their song for 10 days in an effort to promote smart toys for girls. Good job bringing the lyrics to life, Boys! [Hypebot]
* Speaking of intellectual property suits, the University of Alabama sued a company for using a houndstooth pattern because Bear Bryant used to wear hats with a houndstooth pattern that some other company developed. They’ve settled. [SF Gate]
This is the delicate dance done between American cities and the NFL. The American city will bow, the NFL will embrace. They glide across the dancefloor of time and space, dipping and twirling, bumping and grinding. The city and the NFL become one as the dance reaches its climactic stage, the NFL gently caressing the city, like a mother might a child. As the music of the universe crescendos, the NFL will whisper gently into the willing city’s ear.
GIVE ME ALL YOUR F*$&ING MONEY, YOU DIRTY PIECE PIECE OF S&!*
The stadium is built and the dance is complete.
In upstate New York, this thrusting, rapey foxtrot is just getting started. Governor Cuomo, the Bills, Roger Goodell, they’ve all been invited. And so has a lawyer… natch.
Because the Bills need a new stadium and because they need a new owner. Because the state of New York drafted an attorney with tremendous upside potential.
* When it comes to billing rates, starting at the junior level, female law firm partners are still lagging behind their male counterparts by an average of 10 percent less. Boo. [Wall Street Journal (sub. req.)]
* Just in time for the graduation of one of the largest law school classes in history, the Bureau of Labor Statistics says the legal sector is shedding jobs. That sucks. Sorry Class of 2014. [Am Law Daily]
* Law school deans are dropping like flies. Since last week, at least three have announced their intention to leave their positions. We know of one more that we may discuss later. [National Law Journal]
* If you want to work as an attorney, your odds are better if you go to a Top 50 law school. Seventy-five percent of Top 50 grads are working as lawyers, compared to 50% of all others. [WSJ Law Blog (sub. req.)]
* The verdict is in on the latest Apple v. Samsung patent case, and Apple is probably pretty miffed it was awarded only $120M this time, since lawyers for the company requested billions in damages. [Reuters]
* Laura LaPlante, a 3L who was set to graduate from U. Chicago Law on June 16, RIP. [Chicago Tribune]
* Are you a judge or former judge interested in being on television? All you have to do is move into some quasi-Survivor commune. Who would be the best jurist to send out there? I’d say Thomas so he can just stare at everyone silently and offer no assistance. [LawSites Blog]
* Law students fight to get an immigrant lawyer admitted to the bar over 100 years later. Just what California needs. Another lawyer. [UC Davis News & Information]
* Speaking of California needing more lawyers, California law schools are reaching out to community colleges to find students who saved on their undergraduate education and might be willing to start taking on some serious debt. [SF Gate]
* The State of Texas has intervened in a legal brawl between two breweries over the use of the Alamo. One more liberal government trying to take over the free market. [Brewery Law Blog]
* Professor John Banzhaf has an interesting suggestion regarding the death penalty: why are we still using injections anyway? [PR Log]
* “Tacoma needs a law school like I need a hole in the head.” Exactly. [Post Defiance]
* The South Carolina Commission on Higher Education took a big step toward invalidating their own name by approving the sale of Charleston to Infilaw. By the way for comedy’s sake, attached below is a screenshot of the Google News alert I got on this story…. [The State]
The ice cream season is finally here! Can’t you tell from the 50 degree weather and driving rain? Well, technically ice cream season is here and that means the streets will be filled with ice cream trucks peddling their tasty wares and blaring “Pop Goes the Weasel” or some such.
If you’re one of the lucky ones living in a city serviced by the venerable Mister Softee, you’ll get their original song drilled into your head. You can listen to it on a loop here if you’re working at a CIA black site and looking for some new jams to play for your guests. Did you know it had lyrics? Apparently it does. Who knew?
When you’re the preeminent “soft-serve out of a truck” vendor, people come gunning for you. Usually by looking ever so suspiciously exactly like you.
You actually will not believe the name of the company Mister Softee is suing….
The experience of leaving a Biglaw partnership to start a boutique law firm did not allow me to stop thinking about Biglaw. If anything, I think about Biglaw now more than ever. Because the very nesting grounds that I flew away from, IP litigation departments at national and international law firms, are some of my upstart boutique’s biggest competition for new business. And considering our experience with the first five or so cases that our firm has brought, our adversaries as well. Of course, I continue to work with Biglaw firms as co-counsel on some cases as well.
So I think about Biglaw. How it works, and most often how it fights patent cases. For over a decade I was a Biglaw-branded pugilist, and now that I am on the other side of the ring, I am forced to respect but try and beat the Mike Tyson’s Punchout-worthy cast of characters that Biglaw rolls out on behalf of its clients. There are not many Glass Joe’s in the bunch. Which makes it fun.
I would not have left unless I thought that my partners and I would be competitive — both with Biglaw and with the many quality IP boutiques that have come before us and continue to thrive. But as I think back on how IP litigation practice has changed just in the short amount of time that I have been practicing, I take comfort in the fact that the playing field between Biglaw and boutiques has been leveled across a number of fronts. Two areas in particular deserve focus….
* REMEMBER: The last day to vote for your favorite entry in our Law Revue contest is SUNDAY at 11:59 p.m.
* Okay, law students! How far would you go for silence in the library? [Legal Cheek]
* An attorney was suspended for two years for beating up girlfriend who he began dating while she was still a client. But the real punishment seems to be the extensive text message communications attached to the decision. It’s like a teacher making you read the note you were passing out loud in front of the whole class. Cringeworthy clinginess. [The Oklahoma State Courts Network]
* Lawyer’s alleged drunken air rage diverts a trans-Atlantic flight to Dublin. Because if you have a potentially quarrelsome drunk, dropping him off in Ireland is the right answer. [Irish Times]
* Aeropostale is suing H&M over the phrase, “Live Love Dream.” Maybe what they save on originality they pass along to the consumer. [Fashionista]
Whenever clients ask about filing a trademark in China via the Madrid System, our answer is simple: filing a national application directly with the Chinese Trademark Office (CTMO) is better.
China’s trademark system is complicated and overseen by oftentimes capricious examiners, especially as compared to the one-size-fits-all Madrid application that makes registering a trademark in China seem so easy. All you have to do with a China trademark filing via the Madrid System is check the box marked “China.” This lulls Madrid applicants into a sense of complacency, but all too often the result is a rejection that could have been avoided with a national application in China.
Madrid applications are supposed to be cheap and quick, but fixing Madrid problems after the fact is neither. This “Madrid problem” is exacerbated by U.S. lawyers comfortable filing in Madrid but with no experience filing in China.
Trademark prosecution in China is highly mechanical. For the vast majority of applications, you file an application and then wait 18 months for your trademark to be registered or rejected. (A slight oversimplification, but not by much.) China has no CTMO equivalent to a USPTO office action, no back-and-forth with trademark examiners, and no chance to amend an already filed application.
For this reason, the meaningful work for Chinese trademark applications occurs before you file the application…
* A three-judge panel of the Tenth Circuit seemed a bit torn as to the constitutionality of Utah’s same-sex marriage ban during oral arguments yesterday. This one could be a contender to go all the way to the Supremes. [New York Times]
* Another concussion lawsuit has been filed against the National Hockey League by a group of former players, this time alleging a culture of “extreme violence.” The pleadings are a bit… odd. We’ll have more on this later today. [Bloomberg]
* “We’re not going back to 2006 anytime soon,” says NALP executive director Jim Leipold. The legal sector lost lots of jobs in the recession, and they’re not likely to come back. Happy Friday! [National Law Journal]
* It’s never too soon to start writing your law school application essay. Please try not to bore the admissions officers — make sure you have a “compelling” topic. [Law Admissions Lowdown / U.S. News]
* Katherine Heigl (remember her?) probably needed some cash, so she filed a $6M lawsuit against Duane Reade for posting a picture of her carrying one of the drugstore’s bags on Twitter. [Hollywood Reporter]
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past seven years. You can reach them by email: email@example.com.
Please note that Evan Jowers and Robert Kinney are still in Hong Kong and will stay FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS WEEK. We still have a handful of available slots for meetings with our Asia Chronicles fans. If we have not been in touch lately, reach out and let us know when we could meet! There is no need for an agenda at all. Most of our in-person meetings on these trips are with folks who understand that improving a legal practice through lateral hiring is an information-driven process that takes time to handle correctly.
Regarding trends in lateral US associate hiring in Hong Kong, we of course keep much of what we know off of this blog. Based on placement revenue, though, Kinney is having one of our most successful years ever in Asia. We are helping a number of our law firm clients with M&A, fund formation, cap markets, project finance, FCPA and disputes openings. These are very specific needs in many cases, so a conversation with us before jumping in may be helpful. As always, we like to be sure to get the maximum number of interviews per submission, using a well-informed, highly targeted, and selective approach, taking into account short, medium and long-term career aims.
Making a well informed decision during a job search is easier said than done – the information we provide comes from 10 years of being the market leader in US attorney placements at the top tier firms in Asia. There is no substitute for having known a hiring partner since he/she was an associate or for having helped a partner grow his or her practice from zip to zooming, and this is happily where we stand today – with years of background information on just about every relevant person in all the markets we serve, and most especially in Hong Kong/China/Greater Asia. So get in touch and get a download from us this week if we can fit it in, or soon in any case!
The legal industry is being disrupted at every level by technological advances. While legal tech entrepreneurs and innovators are racing to create a more efficient and productive future, there is widespread indifference on the part of attorneys toward these emerging technologies.
When the LexisNexis Cloud Technology Survey results were reported earlier this year, it showed that attorneys were starting to peer less skeptically into the future, and slowly but surely leaning more toward all the benefits the law cloud has to offer.
Because let’s face it, plenty of attorneys are perhaps a bit too comfortable with their “system” of practice management, which may or may not include neon highlighters, sticky notes, dog-eared file folders, and a word processing program that was last updated when the term “raise the roof” was still de rigueur.