Top Law Schools

What degrees outside of law are most sought for intellectual property and why? I know people say engineering/science. Does mathematics fall into this group? Engineering is simply applied mathematics. What about advanced degrees in these fields? Does that help at all or do you just need to be competent enough to pass the Patent Bar?

yellowblue wrote:What degrees outside of law are most sought for intellectual property and why? I know people say engineering/science. Does mathematics fall into this group? Engineering is simply applied mathematics. What about advanced degrees in these fields? Does that help at all or do you just need to be competent enough to pass the Patent Bar?

Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc.

"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

This is not all together true. Yes, math is fundamental to Engineering and Science but there is much more to Engineering and Science than Mathematics. If I put a circuit in front of you could not explain how it is used in a microprocessor. I'm fairly certain that Engineers and Scientists are mostly used in their fields of specialization when they go into IP Law (i.e. an EE would work with circuit and microprocessor based inventions, an ME would work with general machinery) thus a person with a degree in Mathematics will always be passed up for an Engineer or Scientist.

Math majors can't sit for the patent bar. I don't understand what the argument is over.

yellowblue wrote:"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

Yea, if you study engineering for several years.

yellowblue wrote:"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

Maybe not, but IP firms are neither going to train you in physics and engineering nor wait around while you study to gain a physical understanding of the concepts. Mathematics governs the way the work out in engineering problems and provide formulas, but they have very little to do with design. At any rate, you have to have a certain number and type of science courses to be eligible to sit for the patent bar. Thus, most mathematics majors are no good to IP firms. Just because you can understand something does mean that you do or even will understand something.

tl;dnr version: what DF said.

merichard87 wrote:This is not all together true. Yes, math is fundamental to Engineering and Science but there is much more to Engineering and Science than Mathematics. If I put a circuit in front of you could not explain how it is used in a microprocessor. I'm fairly certain that Engineers and Scientists are mostly used in their fields of specialization when they go into IP Law (i.e. an EE would work with circuit and microprocessor based inventions, an ME would work with general machinery) thus a person with a degree in Mathematics will always be passed up for an Engineer or Scientist.

Not only could a math major describe how that circuit works but he/she could tell you how modular arithmetic was first used to develop the circuit. A science major wouldnt be able to do that and an engineering major might or might not be able to. If they cannot then they do not have the mathematical base to learn it in any efficient amount of time should they need to.

stratocophic wrote:

yellowblue wrote:"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

Maybe not, but IP firms are neither going to train you in physics and engineering nor wait around while you study to gain a physical understanding of the concepts. Mathematics governs the way the work out in engineering problems and provide formulas, but they have very little to do with design. At any rate, you have to have a certain number and type of science courses to be eligible to sit for the patent bar. Thus, most mathematics majors are no good to IP firms. Just because you can understand something does mean that you do or even will understand something.

tl;dnr version: what DF said.

this comment is borderline ridiculous. mathematics HAS EVERYTHING to do with design!

yellowblue wrote:

stratocophic wrote:

yellowblue wrote:"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

Maybe not, but IP firms are neither going to train you in physics and engineering nor wait around while you study to gain a physical understanding of the concepts. Mathematics governs the way the work out in engineering problems and provide formulas, but they have very little to do with design. At any rate, you have to have a certain number and type of science courses to be eligible to sit for the patent bar. Thus, most mathematics majors are no good to IP firms. Just because you can understand something does mean that you do or even will understand something.

tl;dnr version: what DF said.

this comment is borderline ridiculous. mathematics HAS EVERYTHING to do with design!

Computer aided design replaced you bro.

Do you know what a transistor is?

Desert Fox wrote:Do you know what a transistor is?

OP: To Wikipedia!

stratocophic wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:Do you know what a transistor is?

OP: To Wikipedia!

I've heard the same bullshit from math majors all the time. They don't really understand what engineering is.

yellowblue wrote:

merichard87 wrote:This is not all together true. Yes, math is fundamental to Engineering and Science but there is much more to Engineering and Science than Mathematics. If I put a circuit in front of you could not explain how it is used in a microprocessor. I'm fairly certain that Engineers and Scientists are mostly used in their fields of specialization when they go into IP Law (i.e. an EE would work with circuit and microprocessor based inventions, an ME would work with general machinery) thus a person with a degree in Mathematics will always be passed up for an Engineer or Scientist.

Not only could a math major describe how that circuit works but he/she could tell you how modular arithmetic was first used to develop the circuit. A science major wouldnt be able to do that and an engineering major might or might not be able to. If they cannot then they do not have the mathematical base to learn it in any efficient amount of time should they need to.

Look, the amount of math required for patent pros: Zero. Nobody cares how modular arithmetic was first used to develop the circuit. They care how this circuit differs from the one that came before it. Math is useless for that.

end of line.

Is OP serious? Math is good and all, and is definitely necessary for engineering, but you can't honestly tell me that a math major, by the very nature of his degree, has a full working knowledge of circuits, software, drug delivery pathways, etc. Just because engineering is applied mathematics doesn't qualify you as an expert in these fields.

Thank you, DF and others, for defending our majors from these math trolls.

BioEBear2010 wrote:Is OP serious? Math is good and all, and is definitely necessary for engineering, but you can't honestly tell me that a math major, by the very nature of his degree, has a full working knowledge of circuits, software, drug delivery pathways, etc. Just because engineering is applied mathematics doesn't qualify you to be an expert in these fields.

Thank you, DF and others, for defending our majors from these math trolls.

Whoever said he/she would have a full working knowledge of these things? Also you cannot honestly tell me that a engineering/science major would have a full working knowledge of all of these either, or even one of them. That would require actual working experience.

Shoutout to Engineers and Scientists for keeping these Math nerds in their place. Ha!

BioEBear2010 wrote:Is OP serious? Math is good and all, and is definitely necessary for engineering, but you can't honestly tell me that a math major, by the very nature of his degree, has a full working knowledge of circuits, software, drug delivery pathways, etc. Just because engineering is applied mathematics doesn't qualify you to be an expert in these fields.

Thank you, DF and others, for defending our majors from these math trolls.

That, sir, is patently false. Math is the fucking devil.

yellowblue wrote:

BioEBear2010 wrote:Is OP serious? Math is good and all, and is definitely necessary for engineering, but you can't honestly tell me that a math major, by the very nature of his degree, has a full working knowledge of circuits, software, drug delivery pathways, etc. Just because engineering is applied mathematics doesn't qualify you to be an expert in these fields.

Thank you, DF and others, for defending our majors from these math trolls.

Whoever said he/she would have a full working knowledge of these things? Also you cannot honestly tell me that a engineering/science major would have a full working knowledge of all of these either, or even one of them. That would require actual working experience.

Perhaps not, but we've got basic exposure to their fundamental principles. You have basic exposure to the fundamental principles' fundamental principles, which is worthless. In math majors' defense, someone studying math's history would have (fundamental principles)^3 and could theoretically be even more worthless.

Stop arguing about this dumb shit. You can't sit for the Patent Bar. Move on.

I don't know all the details, but I have a basic understanding of how a microprocessor works.

I couldn't design one, but I could follow someone else's design.

And no you wouldn't be able to follow it by applying maxwell's equations.

merichard87 wrote:Stop arguing about this dumb shit. You can't sit for the Patent Bar. Move on.

You've never gone to engineering or math school. Arguing about dumb shit is a past time.

Fair or not, you're useless to both private and public entities for patent pros by the nature of your degree. Yes, you may be able to find a patent pros job eventually (if you can even take the patent bar...I doubt you can) but eng/sci majors will be picked over you repeatedly.

Do you really need an engineering or science degree to do patent pros? That's questionable. Assuming you're of above average intelligence you could probably pick up any patent application and get enough of a gist of what is going on to understand an FOAM and the cited prior art, and respond to it half-intelligently. You probably will not be able to write the application because you simply don't know what the fuck is going on. Nonetheless, the risk of you fucking up in either of these situations is substantially higher compared to someone who studied engineering or science because they have a foundation (which you lack) that acts as an 'common sense' compass. Now, if you go out and get said foundation you would be on the same page as everyone else. Until you do, face the facts.

Desert Fox wrote:

merichard87 wrote:Stop arguing about this dumb shit. You can't sit for the Patent Bar. Move on.

You've never gone to engineering or math school. Arguing about dumb shit is a past time.

I couldnt agree more Desert Fox.

yellowblue wrote:"Math isn't really going to help much because patent law is about inventions, not mathematical equations and theory. Its all about application, which is what you learn in engineering/physics/chemistry etc."

What in the world. You havent taken much math/physics/engineering have you? Mathematical theory underlines EVERYTHING that physicists and engineers do. If you are fluent in the language of mathematical theory there is nothing you cannot understand in physics and engineering.

Yes, it underlies it, but patents aren't about THEORY they are about application. The whole rule about not patenting abstract ideas is aimed at preventing patenting of equations. Just because you understand the equation of the theory doesn't mean you'll be able to understand and explain the claims of a patent. As others have said, a math degree doesn't qualify you for the patent bar so obviously the PTO doesn't agree with your line of thinking.

If you really want to do patent law, try getting a Masters in Electrical Engineering. Some school will probably let you. Good luck trying to place catchup though.