INNOVATION AND TRADITION...Cynthia L. Dahl and Victoria F. Phillips, Innovation and Tradition: A...
1
What Subject Matter Do We Handle? Cynthia Laury Dahl University of Pennsylvania Law School 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Small start-ups Individual creators, including inventors, artists, authors and scholars Small non-profits Larger for profit enterprises Medium or large non-profits University technology transfer office Other 61 61 51 18 17 17 13 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 At least one of: Patent; Copyright (not DMCA); TM; TS Privacy or data protection Related torts (e.g. defamation, rights of publicity, rights of privacy) Legislative or regulatory issues (e.g. DMCA, FCC, FTC) Other 64 37 28 26 26 IP/Tech clinic clients include mostly individual creatives and start-ups, but also include large and small non-profits, some for profit entities, and university technology transfer offices. Perhaps surprisingly, IP/Tech clinics don’t all handle traditional IP issues, and most include at least some other topics outside traditional IP. e IP/Tech clinic collaboration with the USPTO allowing student practice provides pro bono IP assistance throughout the country. 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Prosecution/rights acquisition (e.g. USPTO filings; TTAB and PTAB work; prior art searches) Non-prosecution transactional/client counseling (e.g. negotiation; IP audits; drafting licenses, policies, or contracts; fair use analysis; freedom to operate searches) Policy work (e.g. white papers; educational outreach (best practices guides, street law efforts); lobbying; amicus briefs, DMCA anti-circumvention; FolA requests) Litigation (state and federal courts, no TTAB or PTAB) Other 60 52 31 21 24 IP/Tech clinics engage in a diverse range of client work that constantly evolves due to changing community needs. IP/Tech clinics choose clients to further a variety of missions, many related to promoting social justice and the public interest. 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Have a greater social mission Are under a set income cap Represent a larger class Present a unique question of law Bring a larger policy issue to the forefront 14 17 22 13 2 11 10 19 16 12 33 16 16 2 27 11 22 7 1 29 19 10 8 2 1 Not at all important Slightly important Moderately important Very important Mandatory 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1999 e IP/Tech clinic community has seen extraordinary growth over the past two decades. 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 YEAR NUMBER OF CLINICS DOWNLOAD THE ARTICLE INNOVATION AND TRADITION: A Survey of Intellectual Property and Technology Legal Clinics Victoria F. Phillips American University Washington College of Law Who Are Our Clients? How Has the IP/Tech Community Grown Over Time? What is Important to Our Client Selection? What Kind of Work Do We Do? Which Law School Clinics Belong to the USPTO Student Practice Program? # of Clinics Opened Cumulative # of Clinics Cynthia L. Dahl and Victoria F. Phillips, Innovation and Tradition: A Survey of Intellectual Property and Technology Legal Clinics, 25 Clinical L. Rev. 95 (Fall 2018).
Transcript of INNOVATION AND TRADITION...Cynthia L. Dahl and Victoria F. Phillips, Innovation and Tradition: A...
What Subject Matter Do We Handle?
Cynthia Laury DahlUniversity of Pennsylvania Law School
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0Small
start-upsIndividual
creators, including inventors, artists,
authors andscholars
Small non-profits
Larger for profit
enterprises
Medium or large
non-profits
Universitytechnology
transfer office
Other
61 61
51
1817 17
13
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0At least one of:
Patent; Copyright(not DMCA);
TM; TS
Privacy or dataprotection
Related torts (e.g. defamation, rights of publicity, rights of privacy)
Legislative or regulatory issues
(e.g. DMCA, FCC, FTC)
Other
64
37
2826 26
IP/Tech clinic clients include mostly individual creatives and start-ups, but also include large and small non-profits, some for profit entities, and university technology transfer offices.
Perhaps surprisingly, IP/Tech clinics don’t all handle traditional IP issues, and most include at least some other topics outside traditional IP.
The IP/Tech clinic collaboration with the USPTO allowing student practice provides pro bono IP assistance throughout the country.
60
50
40
30
20
10
0Prosecution/rights acquisition (e.g.
USPTO filings; TTAB and PTAB work; prior
art searches)
Non-prosecution transactional/client
counseling (e.g. negotiation; IP audits;
drafting licenses, policies, or contracts; fair use analysis; freedom to operate searches)
Policy work (e.g. white papers; educational
outreach (best practices guides, street law efforts); lobbying;
amicus briefs, DMCA anti-circumvention;
FolA requests)
Litigation (state and federal courts,
no TTAB or PTAB)
Other
60
52
31
2124
IP/Tech clinics engage in a diverse range of client work that constantly evolves due to changing community needs.
IP/Tech clinics choose clients to further a variety of missions, many related to promoting social justice and the public interest.
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0Have a greater social mission
Are under a set income cap
Represent a larger class
Present a unique question of law
Bring a larger policyissue to the forefront
14
17
22
13
2
1110
19
16
12
33
16 16
2
27
11
22
7
1
29
19
108
21
Not at all important
Slightly important
Moderately important
Very important
Mandatory
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
01999
The IP/Tech clinic community has seen extraordinary growth over the past two decades.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Y E A R
NU
MB
ER
OF
CL
INIC
S
D O W N L O A D T H E A R T I C L E
INNOVATION AND TRADITION:A Survey of Intellectual Property and Technology Legal Clinics
Victoria F. PhillipsAmerican University Washington College of Law
Who Are Our Clients?
How Has the IP/Tech Community Grown Over Time?
What is Important to Our Client Selection?
What Kind of Work Do We Do?
Which Law School Clinics Belong to the USPTO Student Practice Program?
# of Clinics Opened
Cumulative # of Clinics
Cynthia L. Dahl and Victoria F. Phillips, Innovation and Tradition: A Survey of Intellectual Property and Technology Legal Clinics, 25 Clinical L. Rev. 95 (Fall 2018).
