Our law firm does not have a Twitter account. But our consulting and patent monetization firm, Markman Advisors, does (@MarkmanAdvisors) — an active one, where we post about patent litigation-related events that are of interest to our followers. Twitter has become our number-one way of interacting with the investment community that is the target for our consulting and patent monetization services.
Yet our law firm still does not have a Twitter account — and I am not convinced it should. As a practicing litigator, I am reluctant to give out my opinions on legal issues through such a broad-reaching medium. Lawyers on Twitter either need to have a lot of guts, or follow the typical boring Biglaw marketing model. I am not interested too much in either approach.
Our engagement with Twitter is relatively recent, dating to the launch of our law firm and consulting practice. Prior to Twitter, our focus was on demonstrating our patent litigation bona fides via investor-focused articles on websites like Seeking Alpha and Harvest. The goal of that work was to demonstrate that Markman Advisors offered investors, inventors, and companies interested in patent situations a unique analytical approach, informed by our collective experience litigating big-ticket patent cases while at Biglaw firms. We were fortunate to build a following on those platforms, which led to meetings with the type of clients we were interested in representing. In the course of those discussions, we found out that for the investment community — traders, hedge funds, whomever — Twitter is a necessary and powerful communications tool.
Context Windows In Legal AI And Why Content Still Determines Quality
Legal teams ask a practical question. If large language models are so capable, why does legal AI still depend on curated content, and why does surfacing that content matter so much?
Being lawyers, our first reaction was skepticism….
While I was in Biglaw, for example, I had a seldom-used personal Twitter account, and never thought of it as an effective platform for reaching clients. I was also aware that my firms had Twitter accounts, but never really gave them much thought, being as they were just tools for the marketing department to disseminate generic information about the firm into the ether. Put another way, I never once in Biglaw had a conversation with either a client or colleague prompted by something the firm put on Twitter. I doubt my experience was atypical. But we quickly learned that unlike Biglaw clients, investors use and even depend on Twitter for news and ideas. They are an engaged audience — because Twitter helps them make money.
In contrast to the typical boring Biglaw marketing-type fare, the content we place on Twitter as Markman Advisors actually drives engagement — with potential and existing clients. Why? Because it can be very valuable, such as when we alert investors to a late-breaking event in a closely-watched patent case, such as a summary judgment decision or verdict. The proof that the information on Twitter can be very valuable for investors? Some of our paying clients rightly restrict our ability to post certain information on Twitter. We are happy to oblige, as we feel strongly that those that pay for our services deserve to derive maximum benefit from our knowledge and insights.
Labor and Employment Federal Litigation Trends 2026
Drawing on more than a decade of data, the report equips law firms and corporate legal teams with actionable insights to better assess risk, refine strategy, and anticipate outcomes in today’s evolving workplace disputes.
For investors, Twitter is a powerful tool. And it is a great way for us to reach that all-important audience. I am not sure whether it is passive or active advertising, as it seems to have elements of both. But it is effective for us. We know that because potential clients have let us know that they read our tweets, and how Twitter has led them to find out more about us. Or even contact us. Perhaps that is why Twitter is such a powerful tool for marketing our consulting business, rather than our law firm. Because the audience for our consulting services uses the platform. In-house counsel that would hire our firm for legal work? Not so much.
So what do we post on Twitter, other than news about patent cases and developments therein? While that content is the bulk of our tweeting activity, we also use Twitter to keep our followers informed about developments regarding our business, such as speaking engagements or product launches, and to direct people to substantive content we have put out. For example, if a company we previously wrote about is in the news for some reason, we may tweet a link to our prior published work on the company. At the same time, we don’t tweet our opinions on legal issues, or investment ideas either. Quite frankly, our investment-focused followers don’t want us to give opinions on what or how to trade. And we don’t want to, especially since the opinions that we feel are truly valuable, such as our take on patent litigation activities, are reserved for our paying clients.
It takes time to develop a following on Twitter, but putting out the right type of content can help. One of the tricks we use to expand our reach is to use stock tickers in tweets whenever possible. That way users interested in news about that company see our tweet, and not just our followers. Another trick is to engage with folks that have a large number of followers in a constructive way. Now that Twitter puts out analytics, it is also helpful for us to see what kinds of tweets generate the most engagement. The analytics also help us understand more about our audience. I was surprised for instance that our Twitter followership is 94% male. In contrast, I was not surprised that the number-one geographic location of our followers is New York City. Or that our followers also follow investor legends like Carl Icahn, Muddy Waters, and Citron Research.
Ultimately, while we have learned a lot about using Twitter to build a following and drive engagement with potential consulting or patent monetization clients, I remain unconvinced that Twitter will ever be a go-to platform for our law firm. If we see in-house counsel becoming more engaged with Twitter as a platform — in a professional rather than personal capacity — then we will gladly take the lessons we have learned from our experience on Twitter as Markman Advisors and use them to help raise awareness of our law firm. If that does not happen, we are more than happy to stick to more traditional forms of marketing our law firm. Maybe one day a law firm will crack the Twitter code. Until then, I hope everyone continues to experiment with the marketing channels that work for them.
Please feel free to send comments or questions to me at [email protected] or via Twitter: @gkroub. Any topic suggestions or thoughts are most welcome.
Gaston Kroub lives in Brooklyn and is a founding partner of Kroub, Silbersher & Kolmykov PLLC, an intellectual property litigation boutique. The firm’s practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and related counseling, with a strong focus on patent matters. You can reach him at [email protected] or follow him on Twitter: @gkroub.