Re: An IP gripe

On Tue, 17 Aug 1999, Mark Lemley <mlemley[_at_]mail.law.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Terence P. McElwee <mcelweet[_at_]info.orsp.mu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I strongly agree with Carol. I too have noticed that Conferences on
> > "Intellectual Property" tend to be about 80-90% patent law, making it
> > difficult to find good educational opportunities. I just received my
> > latest issue of the Marquette University Intellectual Property Law
> > Journal and noticed for the first time that copyright, trademark and
> > trade secret are rarely covered.
> >
> *********
>
> The view from the academic world is a bit different. 90% of the
> "IP" law professors in this country really do copyright law. 90%
> of the IP jobs for graduates are in patent law. Most of the articles
> by professors in the law reviews are similarly directed to copyright.
> My impression is that students who do IP largely end up taking
> copyright classes, but working in patent law.

This is an interesting point. I suspect students could benefit from taking an IP course that spent substantial time covering subject matter that is subject to both copyright and patent. (The obvious example -- today -- being computer programs). In this manner, the future clients of these new lawyers will be well-served, indeed. And, we should not overlook the fact that patent lawyers do patent law (from beginning to end), but many lawyers (in the U.S.) provide legal assistance on copyright and trademark matters. Interestingly enough, in the publishing industry, copyright issues are often handled by editors and agents until a lawsuit is filed.

-- 


Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law
Rutgers University School of Law - Camden
rod[_at_]cyberspaces.org
http://www.cyberspaces.org/