Hi I am posting this for a friend. Please POST all replies to the net. Thanks. Kevin I recently started reading these groups, so please forgive me if this question was asked recently. I am writing because I am applying to law school and am trying to figure out how I could use a law degree in conjunction to issues of technology. Most colleagues and friends have suggested looking into patent law, but I am not certain that I have enough technical experience to be effective as a patent attorney. I studied mechanical engineering as an undergraduate major but eventually took a position in LAN support for a pharmaceutical company and am still in that position. My work does occasionally stray into the technical, but I do not have say, experience in real software development. Thus, I don't know if I'd have enough technical computing skills to work in software patents. I am more interested in computing policies and the law as it relates to computers. I have seen more than my share of complaints about selectively enforced computing security policies, as well as a lack of understanding of technology on the part of computing professionals. I guess more than anything else, I would like to pursue a legal (or even non-legal though not illegal) career related to either computers, information or investigation or some combination thereof. My two main questions are thus: 1) Does anyone know of any legal specialties related to these areas? 2) What if any law schools tend to specialize in such areas? Please let me know. Thanks.

2) What if any law schools tend to specialize in [computer related] areas? I'm looking into the same type of things and have come down to applying to Columbia, Georgetown, NYU, Stanford, and University of Washington.  I don't have my notes here at work, but both Columbia and Stanford have explicit programs in Law, Science, and Technology, and the other schools listed have professors with strengths and interests in those areas. Request applications and course catalogs and research. _____________________________________ Joshua M.K. Masur

2) What if any law schools tend to specialize in such areas? See the FAQ, below. IP law school FAQ. Q.  Which law school should I go to if I am interested in intellectual property? Alternate forms of this question are: I have heard that X, Y, and Z are the best for intellectual property. How do I decide which of those three to attend? I plan to do patent law.  Where should I go to law school? A related question is: I have no technical background, but would like to do patent law anyway. What should I do next? So here is one person's perspective on the answers to these questions. Obviously one should get other opinions besides mine.  The smart thing to do is to call up the persons or companies who would be your clients, and ask them for their opinions. First, I am delighted that the question is asked.  There is a shortage of bright, clever patent lawyers in the US, and this shortage shows no sign of going away. By bright, clever patent lawyers I mean persons who meet this de_script_ion:  very strong background in physics, electronics, at least a year of chemistry, programs in assembler and high-level languages, and high LSAT score.  Or, very strong background in biochemistry (i.e. a PhD) and high LSAT score. All the time there are people who would make good patent lawyers going to law school and unaccountably graduating and doing something completely different, such as banking law.  I hope this FAQ would encourage some of those people to think of patent law as well. Picking a law school.  Yes, there are three or so schools that loudly proclaim, to anyone who will listen, that they are the best place for patent law.  My advice is to pay no attention to that.  Go to the highest reputation school you can get admitted to, regardless of whether or not it is known for patent law.  There are several reasons I say this. First, the law school you attend will make an enormous difference as you look for that first job out of law school (and as you look for those summer jobs during law school).  People at Harvard and Yale and a few other schools have no trouble getting summer jobs, and get to pick and choose among job offers when graduation approaches.  People at lots of other schools don't get to be choosy, or don't get jobs at all.  There are law schools where, a year after graduation, half the graduates still have not found work. To be concrete about this, at most law schools a book is prepared by the placement office, with a page for each candidate student.  The book is then printed and distributed to potential employers.  The employers flip through it and consider to whom they will grant an interview. In contrast, at Harvard and Yale and a few other schools, the placement office makes no student book.  Instead, the employers fill out questionnaires, which are then bound into a book copies of which are given to the law students.  The law students then flip through it and decide which interviews they will bother to go to. Does that give some idea why it is better to go to a very well-known law school, even if it it not known for patent law, rather than to go to a lesser-known school that says it specializes in patent law? Second, potential employers give little or no weight to a school's supposed reputation for intellectual property.  I am a partner of a patent law firm, and over the years I have screened thousands of resumes.  The sorting criteria are fairly simple.  People with no technical background are flushed.  People with weak technical background are flushed.  From what's left, one hopes to winnow out some of the bright ones.  If the person is from Harvard or Yale, for example, it is likely they are bright.  If the person is from law review elsewhere, it is likely they are bright.  Other things in resumes may also come into play. It is of less than no interest to me if the person went to one of the supposed IP law schools.  I don't even notice that on resumes. The fact is, even at one of the supposed IP law schools, you are (one hopes) learning mostly non-IP things

: My two main questions are thus: : 1) Does anyone know of any legal specialties related to these areas? I think that you should focus somewhat on property type courses.  After all, the obvious area where technology and the law intersect is ownership rights.  Thus, familiarity with intellectual property, trademarks, copyrights, patents and other aspects of the rights involved with ownership would be helpful.  I'm not suggesting that you should specialize in any of these areas, but a strong understanding of these areas will probably be essential. I might also add that I too was involved in the technology field before I started law school, and thought I might combine both disciplines. However, once I got to law school I saw a many interesting areas in which to specialize.  I'm now a third year student pursuing a joint JD/LL.M in Taxation.  I'm just suggesting to go in with an open mind. Good luck. Jeff NYU School of Law

I might also add that I too was involved in the technology field before I started law school, and thought I might combine both disciplines.   I had heard that patent lawyers with technical backgrounds would be in big demand.  Was that not quite the case or did you just find something more interesting to you? -Scott

I looked into patent, but I was told by a patent professor that my technical background (i.e. computers) was not the sort of technical background (e.g. chemistry, engineering, etc.) that patent firms were looking for.  I also sent a mass mailing to patent firms, and as the professor suspected, there wasn't much interest in someone with a systems background. In general I've also found this to be the case.  I've been teaching computer science & MIS at the university level for 8 years, but I'm not allowed to sit for the patent bar exam because I don't have a technical background.  At the patent office, technical < computer. Furthermore, I was suprised that law firms didn't value computer expertise more than they do.  As someone explained to me, they don't go out of their way to hire doctors just because they handle medical malpractice cases.  It seems that many firms believe attorneys can learn enough computer concepts on the job to handle any computer litigation that might come along. David McGraw Instructor: Gallaudet University Student:    Georgetown University Law Center This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it