Last week, I presented Part I of my written interview with patent attorney and host of Clause 8, Eli Mazour. That column presented his answer to the first of my three questions and focused on the origins and goals of the Clause 8 podcast series. What follows are Eli’s answers to my remaining two questions. As usual, I have added some brief commentary to his answers below, but have otherwise presented his answers as he provided them.
2) Your interviews started off with a bang — two former Federal Circuit Chief Judges. Have you noticed a difference interviewing judges as opposed to practitioners?
EM: First, Judge Michel told me a great story about his road to becoming a federal judge. It might be of particular interest in light of the recent confirmation battle, especially to old Underneath Their Robes fans like yourself. Before his time on the Federal Circuit, Judge Michel worked for Sen. Specter for many years in hopes of eventually getting a judgeship. However, right before Judge Michel was supposed to get nominated by President Reagan, Specter voted against Bork’s confirmation. After the vote, Specter took Judge Michel for a “walk” to tell him that he probably wasn’t going to get nominated as a result. Instead, due to some unique circumstances that he explains during the podcast, President Reagan ended up nominating Judge Michel anyways.
What Even Is AI ‘Competence’? It Depends.
Takeaways from a Legalweek panel on evolving malpractice risks.
What I find most interesting about former Federal Circuit Chief Judges Michel and Randall Rader is that after reaching the pinnacle of the IP profession, they both came to the conclusion that America’s patent system is heading in the wrong direction. They didn’t always agree while on the Federal Circuit and took different approaches to their roles as Chief Judges. However, they now share a unique vantage point from devoting their lives to public service and their willingness to speak openly about what went wrong and how it should be fixed. For example, in my interview with Judge Rader before Justice Gorsuch was on the court, he expressed disappointment in conservative Supreme Court Justices’ failure to apply conservative judicial principles in patent cases. However, he and Judge Michel expressed hopeful guidance about how many of our patent system’s problems could be fixed at just the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) itself. Some of these recommendations are now being implemented by Trump’s new USPTO Director.
Most practitioners aren’t able to have same 10,000-foot view — or at least the freedom to be as frank — because they are understandably influenced by the type of work that they do for their clients. I am also cognizant that most Clause 8 listeners have much more pressing issues: what is the best possible advice that I can provide to my clients? How do I get new clients? What do I need to do to become a successful attorney? Should I even go into IP law? Practitioners — like you — who thought about and successfully overcame these types of issues have much more interesting advice to share on these practical subjects.
I’ve also been lucky that many of my guests have shared very interesting stories that have nothing to do with intellectual property. For example, Judge Rader accidentally ended up across the border in the Soviet Union while doing missionary work in Finland. Judge Michel served as the Assistant Watergate Special Prosecutor. And, Doug Henderson, who founded the largest IP firm in America, saw his neighbor Nino Scalia fearlessly perform CPR on their neighbor’s lawn.
I hope to have more interviews with intellectual property practitioners that have interesting backstories. If you’re a former TV child star who became an intellectual property attorney or a former Deputy Secretary of Defense who is now a patent litigator, I’d love to interview you!
Opus 2 Steps Up Its AI Game With Acquisition Of A Legal Tech Startup
With the addition of Uncover’s technology, the litigation software is delivering rapid innovation.
GK: Presenting listeners with a range of viewpoints and personalities is a worthy goal for any podcast host and Eli has Clause 8 off to a hot start on that front. At the same time, it is clear that Eli appreciates the sometimes starkly different experiences that different practitioners can garner over the course of a career, depending on the nature of their practice or their role in the IP ecosystem. And hearing personal stories of the type that Eli has already been able to elicit from his interviewees not only makes the podcasts more interesting, but also helps us appreciate how informed our personal lives can be from our professional experiences and vice versa.
3) How has the Clause 8 experience to date impacted your practice?
EM: Most of my firm’s practice focuses on patent portfolio development for large technology companies. Whenever I do a Clause 8 interview, I try to always think about issues that our clients face in order to be able learn as much as possible myself about how to best advice our clients and to educate other lawyers in my position. Specifically, whenever possible, I try to ask questions that will help inform in-house counsel when making difficult decisions. It’s always nice to hear when in-house counsel comes across and enjoys one of my interviews but I’m overjoyed when they find some part of the interview particularly relevant.
In the future, I hope to use my Clause 8 experience to be able to advise clients about patent-related developments and how to prudently and effectively impact patent policy. Compared to other policy areas, I think that there’s still a dearth of understanding regarding the forces that shape patent policies and how potential policy changes practically impact companies. As a result, companies often waste resources without getting results or push for policies that won’t make a positive difference for the companies in the long run.
GK: Just as there is room for a podcast series focused on IP personalities, so too is there a need for using podcasts as a means of informing clients and colleagues on legal and economic developments. Whether one consumes podcasts while commuting, or exercising, or even while doing work around the house, with today’s technology we are never far from a podcast playing device of some sort. At the same time, it seems more and more difficult to stop and actually read an article in full, which I think bodes well for a future and continued increase in popularity for audio content of substance. Either way, Eli is clearly well-positioned to provide his listeners what they will find most entertaining and informative.
My thanks to Eli for the insights and cooperation, and I wish him continued success and fulfillment with his practice and Clause 8. As I have said before, it is always a privilege to hear from (or be interviewed by) an established IP personality, especially one with such a big role to play in letting IP leaders tell their stories. I am always open to conducting interviews of this type with other IP thought leaders, so feel free to reach out if you have a compelling perspective to offer.
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, and Markman Advisors LLC, a leading consultancy on patent issues for the investment community. Gaston’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.