Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
User avatar
sanetruth
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:26 pm

Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby sanetruth » Mon May 03, 2010 2:09 pm

So, I was always under the impression that it was only patent law that required any type of engineering-type experience, but a lot of people on this site keep automatically equating someone who wants to study IP with someone who must be experienced in engineering/sciences. It was my understanding that patent law required this type of technical background, but copyright law students could come from any number of backgrounds.

I ask to clear this up because it will most certainly play a roll in someone's application who explicitly states they are hoping to pursue IP.

User avatar
remotelyfeasible
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 5:31 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby remotelyfeasible » Mon May 03, 2010 5:02 pm

Not all patent work requires a science background, only patent prosecution.

I think there is more patent work than other types of IP work, at least at big firms.

User avatar
DOOM
Posts: 142
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:54 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby DOOM » Mon May 03, 2010 5:09 pm

firms also like to see engineering/science backgrounds for patent litigation. It's preferred, but not at all required.

the tech background isn't needed for copyright/trademark.

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby merichard87 » Mon May 03, 2010 8:39 pm

We have had this discussion a few times on here. An engineering background is only required for patent prosecution. Many firms like to see an engineering background for patent litigation as well but it is not required. Also, you definitely don't need an engineering background for copyright/trademark but I think many of us agreed that since copyright/trademark is usually a smaller portion of the IP work so many firms tend to hire people who are eligible to do all portions of IP which would be engineers. Not sure how true that last part is but its something to think about.

Leeroy Jenkins
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 10:19 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby Leeroy Jenkins » Mon May 03, 2010 8:42 pm

If you want to go into any field of IP law, you require at least a Ph.D. in science or engineering to be taken seriously. You also need to have passed the patent bar and have at least 2 years experience as a patent agent. This way, law firms have to spend $0 to train you because you already know how to do your job.

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby merichard87 » Mon May 03, 2010 8:56 pm

Leeroy why are you lying to the poor noobs?

User avatar
BriaTharen
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:17 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby BriaTharen » Mon May 03, 2010 9:56 pm

merichard87 wrote:Leeroy why are you lying to the poor noobs?

Leeroy isn't lying. He's just trying to make sure they know the truth before they find out the hard way.

User avatar
merichard87
Posts: 751
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 2:31 pm

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby merichard87 » Mon May 03, 2010 10:05 pm

Since when do you need a PhD to be a patent attorney? I know that they look for them in big pharm and the life science related patents but not engineering.

Action Jackson
Posts: 328
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2008 12:46 am

Re: Intellectual Property and Engineering relationship

Postby Action Jackson » Tue May 04, 2010 6:17 pm

sanetruth wrote:So, I was always under the impression that it was only patent law that required any type of engineering-type experience, but a lot of people on this site keep automatically equating someone who wants to study IP with someone who must be experienced in engineering/sciences.


Because patent prosecution is the only type of IP law that actually has all the benefits people associate with IP law -- fewer hours, less stress, greater job stability, etc. Copyright and trademark attorneys are like any other attorneys.




Return to “Law School FAQ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests