This semester we have received several warnings from our Internet service provider that copyrighted movies and TV shows are being downloaded illegally via our wireless network. The Information Technology office is now ascertaining who is doing this. Once we have names of the individuals involved, we intend to give them to the copyright holders for enforcement purposes.
This stance proved unpopular with BLS students, as well as ATL readers. In a poll, about 75 percent of readers answered “yes” when asked, “Should Brooklyn Law School do more to protect its students from being sued for illegal downloading?”
It seems that Brooklyn Law School has had a change of heart. Check out the email that went out this afternoon, plus selected reader comments, after the jump.
Today we received this e-mail from the administration, which is causing quite an uproar among the student body.
The gist of it seems to be that, contrary to the practice of other schools, BLS will begin actively investigating [illegal] downloading and proactively providing names of people to media [companies] so [the individuals in question] can be sued.
I believe the typical practice at other schools (graduate and undergraduate) and institutions is to wait for a subpoena and either cooperate or fight the subpoena, not to go out of their way to inform on their students.
The total cost of attendance at Brooklyn Law for the 2009-2010 academic year, for full-time students not living with their parents (God forbid), is a shade over $66,000. Shouldn’t that buy BLS’s silence?
Or is the law school in the right here? Shouldn’t law students, i.e., future lawyers, know and follow the law?
The Great Recession has been tough for many different types of firms — and that even includes intellectual property firms. During the past year, IP-focused shops have cut back on hiring, slashed salaries, and lost key partners to larger firms.
A few recent developments at Finnegan Henderson, the D.C.-based IP powerhouse, reflect the new realities. Multiple sources report the following:
1. Earlier this week, at an “all associates” meeting, the firm announced that it is freezing associate salaries.
2. At the same meeting, the firm announced that it is reducing first-year associate salaries from $160,000 to $145,000 (in all offices).
UPDATE: We understand that Finnegan has frozen support staff salaries as well.
Two additional items about Finnegan, after the jump.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:56 AM - By David Lat
We’ve covered in these pages the many challenges faced by standalone intellectual property firms. One of them is competition from Biglaw shops seeking to scoop up top talent in the IP field.
Yesterday morning, Robert C. Sullivan Jr., president and managing principal of Darby & Darby, sent around an internal email announcing the departure of two prominent partners, Joseph Robinson (pictured) and Robert Shaffer. Robinson and Shaffer, who specialize in patent litigation, counseling and procurement, are joining the New York office of McDermott Will & Emery.
It’s not happy news for Darby, which a tipster describes as “one of the last IP boutiques of any meaningful size, [but] gasping for breath as it is.” Robinson, a biotech expert and noted patent litigator, is said to have been one of the firm’s top-grossing partners, “probably to the tune of about $4 million.” Darby is holding a town hall meeting to discuss the defections.
A source issues this warning to Robinson’s new colleagues at MWE:
[Robinson] is a control freak who wields the power he gets from high earnings with an iron fist…. He is a significant reason for the many partner and practice group defections at Darby in the past few years, and now he’s gone too. McDermott will love the revenue, hate the attitude.
In Robinson’s defense, does he sound all that different from many top partners or successful litigators?
Robert Sullivan’s email announcing the departures, after the jump.
Friday, October 16, 2009 12:36 PM - By Elie Mystal
The American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) sued AT&T and Verizon looking to recoup additional royalty fees from people who use ringtones. ASCAP members already receive money from ringtone purchases, but they wanted more money. You know, like a little charge every time a phone rings or something. They lost:
A federal judge has dismissed the music industry contention that when a cellphone’s ringtone begins playing, copyright infringement starts happening since others can hear the song, essentially arguing that a mobile phone is a portable concert hall.
That argument meant that millions of mobile phone users were copyright scofflaws anytime anyone called them.
I don’t think the insufferable noise pollution emanating from the pockets and purses of lemmings who think they are showing individuality is anything at all like a public concert. I’m glad at least one federal judge agrees with me.
The decision (pdf) made it clear that there was no infringement when ringtones are played without any commercial purpose. So make sure you don’t ever ask somebody to pay you for the privilege of listening to your phone. Not only do you run a high risk of getting punched in the face, you also might cause this nonsense argument to waste more judicial time.
What should be done to protect fashion designers from copycats? Law professor Gerard Magliocca would probably say nothing, but other observers are more sympathetic to the designers. Law profs Scott Hemphill (recently married) and Jeannie Suk (half of celebrity couple Feldsuk) propose what they call “the squint test.”
Although fashion designs don’t currently enjoy copyright protection, designers who feel they’ve been ripped off do have other options. They can try suing under a theory of trade dress infringement, which is exactly what some of them have been doing.
Trade dress litigation over fashion designs seems as ubiquitous this season as thigh-high boots. Alexander McQueen recently sued Steve Madden, claiming that Madden’s Seryna peeptoe bootie is a ripoff of McQueen’s Faithful model (see for yourself here). Meanwhile, Forever 21, the fashion retailer known for cheap knock-offs, umm, affordable interpretations of designer fashion, has settled a lawsuit brought by Trovata, the Newport Beach clothing company. Trovata claimed that Forever 21 was copying its striped tees, sweaters and blouses.
You can read more, compare the designs, and comment, over at Fashionista (links below).
Thank you for registering to participate in the AIPLA Career Fair. Please be aware that our attendance for firms/companies participation in the AIPLA Career Fair is not what we expected for this year. We’ve followed up with the Firms and Companies and they have indicated that they do not have positions available and/or not hiring at the present time.
Currently we have 9 firms participating in the Career Fair and we have over 350 Job Seekers that have registered to participate in the Fair. We strongly encourage you to only plan to come to the Career Fair if you have a confirmed interview or were otherwise planning on attending the AIPLA Annual Meeting. If you joined as an AIPLA Student Member between September 1 through October 6, 2009 to participate in the AIPLA Career Fair we will offer you a complimentary Annual Meeting Registration…. The Annual Meeting, which runs from October 15-17, will offer Educational Session, Committee Meetings, Continuing Legal Education Credit and is a Great Networking Opportunity!
Regards, AIPLA Meetings Dept.
I can’t believe that I have to ask this, but does anybody know where an IP attorney can get a job?
Today we turn our attention to what’s widely viewed as a hot field: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. The reader who requested IP law as a subject offered an overview of the field:
IP is a very variable, different, and often forgotten practice of law that is mostly inhabited by engineers and science geeks who have no problems wearing Cosby sweaters and bad shoes around their workplaces.
More serious reflections, plus some questions, after the jump.
Friday, September 25, 2009 3:56 PM - By Elie Mystal
The myth that IP boutiques would be immune from the recession has already been debunked. Today, a few more intellectual property lawyers came back down to earth with the rest of the legal industry.
Above the Law has obtained an internal memo from the IP firm Townsend and Townsend and Crew. The firm is cutting salaries:
All- After much deliberation and consideration of the various issues involved, including the thoughtful input of the associates, the Policy Committee has made the decision to restructure associate compensation for 2010 as follows:
1) The associate pay scale for 2010 will be adjusted so that starting salaries for first year associates will be $145,000.
But don’t get too attached to that lockstep system, Townsend associates. After the jump, we see that Townsend wants to join the cool kids hanging out behind the gym lighting lockstep on fire.
Mainly we’re posting this because it’s a Friday afternoon and rainy (at least here in New York). We figure you need some entertainment to launch you into the weekend.
But there is a legal angle to this music video. It might have spawned intellectual property litigation, if Disney — and Miley Cyrus — didn’t have such a good sense of humor. Enjoy!
(If you like, feel free to discuss “fair use” issues in the music video context in the comments.)
Thursday, August 27, 2009 11:28 AM - By Elie Mystal
Sources report that Fish & Richardson will cut its entire corporate department as of January 1, 2010.
To be fair, Fish & Richardson is more known for its IP work. Its corporate department is relatively small. But cutting an entire practice group seems like an extreme cost cutting measure. The firm has already cut associate salaries and laid off associates.
There are a few things we don’t know. Although our sources tell us the corporate department will be cut firm-wide, our sources are clustered in only one Fish office. We don’t know if corporate associates will be offered other jobs in the firm as of 1/1/10, and we don’t know if the move is being precipitated by a large group of Fish corporate partners leaving.
That’s because the Fish associates we spoke with were informed of the news in a curious way. Details after the jump.
Don’t get too comfortable with that shiny new #6 Vault ranking, Weil Gotshal. The firm just got served, Texas style. The ABA Journal reports:
The Texas judge who ordered Microsoft to pay $290 million for infringing a patent included a $40 million enhancement that he said was partly justified because of alleged trial misconduct by a lawyer from Weil, Gotshal & Manges.
U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis tacked on the $40 million penalty because of evidence of willful infringement. But also “favoring enhancement,” he said in an opinion, was trial conduct by lawyer Matthew Douglas Powers, a Weil Gotshal partner.
Matthew Douglas Powers is a big name in IP circles. And he’s the co-chair of Weil’s litigation department. But he’s not going to comment on Judge Davis’s $40 million critique of his trial performance.
What were the judge’s reasons for admonishing Powers? Check after the jump.
See, there are tons of things you can do with a soft liberal arts degree, including being an IP lawyer in Biglaw. Today’s job of the week, brought to you by Lateral Link, is one of several new openings at big firms around the country. If you are an associate considering a lateral move, you should contact your Lateral Link search consultant to discuss the options.
Position: IP Transactional Associate
Location: New York, NY
Description: A top international law firm is seeking a mid-level IP transactional associate to work on a variety of corporate intellectual property matters including technology transactions, licensing arrangements, IP components of M&A and corporate finance deals, and handling dealings with the USPTO.
For more information on this position or to apply, please see position #5156 on Lateral Link, or you can contact T.J. Duane at tjduane@laterallink.com. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.
You learn a few things when you survive a major outbreak of alleged racism before you even graduate from law school. One thing you learn is that you don’t have to step aside quietly when million-dollar judgments go against your client.
Last month, we reported that Jammie Thomas-Rasset — who is represented by K.A.D. Camara — was hit with a $1.92 million judgment for illegally downloading 24 songs. When we spoke to Camara about the verdict, he expressed his belief that the high penalty could be problematic for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA):
I think a verdict this high may backfire against the RIAA. It makes clear that there’s a problem with the statute. And there are many grounds for appeal in Jammie’s case.
The problem is that Jammie Thomas-Rasset has already been tried twice.
But that isn’t going to stop the law firm of Camara & Sibley. Threat Level reports that Camara has asked U.S. District Judge Michael Davis to set aside the $1.92 million verdict, declare the Copyright Act unconstitutional, or at least order a new jury trial to assess damages.
Put another way, we’ve gotten to the “kitchen sink” point of this litigation.
Although not completely immune to the downturn, intellectual property has weathered the recession better than many other practice areas. Today’s Job of the Week, brought to you by Lateral Link, is for an IP position in California. Lateral Link recently placed an attorney at this company, and they are now looking to expand their legal department with another IP attorney.
Position: Senior Corporate Counsel / Director of IP
Location: San Jose, CA
Description: The attorney will be the third attorney in the legal department and will have significant and wide-ranging responsibilities and opportunities for career advancement. The individual will primarily be responsible for intellectual property litigation management, intellectual property portfolio management, complex technology licensing and related commercial contracts.
Primary responsibilities will include managing the company’s ongoing intellectual property litigation matters, aggressively pursuing indemnification claims against suppliers and effectively defending against such claims from vendors, advising the company on IP issues, cost-effectively supervising outside counsel, developing and coordinating IP portfolio strategy for the company, negotiating complex technology licensing agreements and consulting on open-source matters. Opportunity exists to gain experience in other functional areas as well, such as corporate governance, SEC reporting, mergers and acquisitions, etc. This is a fantastic opportunity to join a well-established company and be part of an exciting group.
For more information on this position or to apply, please see Position #10569 on Lateral Link. Current members can also contact their personal search consultant directly to discuss this position. Membership in Lateral Link is free and you can apply at www.laterallink.com.
P.S. A reminder: if your firm is offering a paid deferral, please contact your Lateral Link search consultant, since Lateral Link has dozens of in-house positions for deferred attorneys.
The internal announcement just went out, Fish is laying off 120 people:
The global recession has profoundly impacted many businesses. Continuing to face unprecedented levels of economic uncertainty in the marketplace, the firm has decided to make workforce adjustments that will ensure our continued strength during these turbulent times. Specifically, we have reduced our legal staff by 35 and our support staff by 85 across our U.S. offices.
Fish & Richardson spokespeople did not respond to our requests for comment. But it appears that cuts are happening across all of Fish’s offices.
This round of layoffs is being cast differently than last time. Details after the jump.
In these dire times, there are few refuges from the storm. Even the world of intellectual property is not immune to the downturn.
Today Townsend and Townsend and Crew (no ampersands), a prominent intellectual property firm, announced layoffs: 16 attorneys, 45 staff. Here’s an excerpt from the memo, issued by firm chairman James Gilliland, which contains discussion of the broader market for IP work:
We have resisted for as long as we reasonably could the worldwide economic forces buffeting our clients and our profession. However, after much long and careful deliberation, Townsend today has joined so many other AmLaw 200 firms and implemented a reduction in force. This is the most painful decision any of us has ever had to make at this firm.
As you know, Townsend expanded rapidly over the past few years to meet our clients’ burgeoning need for IP services. By the fourth quarter of 2008, however, those clients began scaling back their spending because of the enormous financial uncertainty they faced. Likewise, in the first three months of 2009 new patent filings in the PTO, and new file openings at Townsend, have both declined. While our clients continue to innovate, and continue to call on Townsend to protect their most significant innovations, our optimistic projections for the future now must be moderated.
Back in January, Townsend announced a salary freeze, noting that “all of the economic indicators for 2009 remain negative.” Today’s layoffs suggest that the situation is not improving.
Of course, Townsend still has some work. For example, they’re representing engineering and construction giant Bechtel in a trademark infringement suit. But it takes a lot of work to sustain the workforce of an Am Law 200 firm with seven offices around the country.
Thursday, February 19, 2009 4:19 PM - By Kashmir Hill
Ed. note: This is a guest post by Keith Chapman, a lawyer with more knowledge of BitTorrent and all things tech than the regular crew on the ATL ship.
Avast ye hearties! Especially if you’re one of those hearties using a BitTorrent client to purloin copyrighted materials. Today marks the fourth day in the highly publicized trial against The Pirate Bay, a Swedish company that organizes and facilitates online file swapping. At the heart of the matter, Swedish prosecutors have charged The Pirate Bay’s three chief administrators, Hans Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg and Peter Sunde, as well as media savvy Swedish businessman Carl Lundström, with 33 instances of assisting in and preparing to commit copyright infringement. With potential jail time looming on the horizon, not to mention hefty fines and damages estimated north of $14 million, the Times of London has dubbed the case the “Internet piracy trial of the decade.”
If you are just tuning in, find out what you’ve missed — after the jump.
Thursday, November 20, 2008 10:37 AM - By Elie Mystal
Last month, we reported that K&L Gates would stop paying bar association fees for their attorneys.
Now, we’ve learned that Kaye Scholer has decided to stop paying membership fees for the New York Intellectual Property Law Association:
As announced in October, each individual attorney now is responsible for maintaining his or her membership in NYIPLA. Both new membership and renewals for 2009 should be paid in full and received by NYIPLA no later than December 31, 2008.
I thought IP attorneys were a golden goose in this rapidly declining legal market? Why would you piss them off?
The annual membership dues are $200 for lawyers with more than five years experience, $130 for attorneys with less than five years under their belt.
Based on figures we’ve received, Kaye Scholer stands to save (wait for it …) $9,920.
Keeping your associates enrolled in an organization that helps them enhance their skills < $9K?
Thursday, November 6, 2008 10:16 PM - By Elie Mystal
New lawyers to lead the nation are sending in their resumes. Already, UC Berkeley School of Law Dean Christopher Edley has received a choice position as part of Obama’s transition advisory board. (I wonder if he’s accepting resumes from his students?)
Here’s an interesting choice for Edley and the rest of the transition team that will be picking the next Solicitor General. According to the Legal Times:
No woman has ever served as solicitor general, but a number have been mentioned as candidates for the job in an Obama administration. Stanford Law School professors Kathleen Sullivan and Pamela Karlan and Harvard Law School Dean Elena Kagan are possibilities, as well as Morrison & Foerster partner Beth Brinkmann and MetLife litigation counsel Teresa Wynn Roseborough.
They could also be considered to lead of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which produces legal opinions on complex matters for the attorney general and the president. Lawyers who have held both positions have gone on to become Supreme Court justices. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes and Justices Stanley Reed and Thurgood Marshall were solicitors general. The late Chief Justice William Rehnquist and current Justice Antonin Scalia once headed the Office of Legal Counsel. That experience could come in handy should one or more Supreme Court justices step down in the next four years.
Speculation has also centered on prominent African-American attorneys who may be ready to step forward:
Valerie Jarrett (Stanford, Michigan Law): Jarrett is a longtime Obama adviser, who’s now one of three people heading his transition team. She told the WSJ that blacks won’t be pigeonholed into “historically conventional” roles, such as secretary of housing and urban development or assistant attorney general for civil rights.
Yesterday we reported on this announcement by Brooklyn Law School:
Continue reading "Brooklyn Law Won’t Proactively Rat Out Its Students"
(50) Comments
The Great Recession has been tough for many different types of firms — and that even includes intellectual property firms. During the past year, IP-focused shops have 
We’ve covered in these pages the many challenges faced by standalone intellectual property firms. One of them is competition from Biglaw shops seeking to scoop up top talent in the IP field.
You learn a few things when you survive a 
In these dire times, there are few refuges from the storm. Even the world of intellectual property is not immune to the downturn.
