FCC Attorney Forum

[Ruxin1]

sarcasm font is needed

[Renne Walker]

I think you're probably just imagining a legal specialization that doesn't exactly exist.

Yep, that must be what it is, just imagining a legal specialization that does not exist.

Well, thanks to everyone who posted, law school is about to begin. I am sure everyone here will do just fine.

[Heartford]

I think you're probably just imagining a legal specialization that doesn't exactly exist.

Yep, that must be what it is, just imagining a legal specialization that does not exist.

Well, thanks to everyone who posted, law school is about to begin. I am sure you will do just fine.

I did do just fine during 1L, thank you very much! Have fun lecturing your peers about these "FCC Attorneys" who don't work for the FCC!

[Anonymous User]

I doubt if anyone doing telecom regulatory work would ever refer to themselves as "FCC" attorneys. The term, FCC attorney, suggests that you are referring to someone employed by the FCC.

The FCC Attorneys who work at major law firms such as Wiley Ryan refer to themselves as “FCC Attorneys”―as do their media clientele. FCC attorneys work for telecommunications companies, then there are attorneys who work for the FCC. . . not the same.

The purpose of the thread is to see if anyone in TLS land is considering employment as an FCC attorney, if so, I would love to hear from you.

I worked for Wiley Rein (not Wiley Ryan), and you are right that there are a lot of people there who do telecom/mass media regulatory work. They do not, and would not, use the term "FCC Attorneys" to refer to someone in the communications practice.

(anonymous so as not to out myself)

[Renne Walker]

Since you once worked at Wiley Rein you might be acquainted with “Doc.” He will tell you, without hesitation, that his media clientele refer to him as their FCC attorney. In the NAB’s media directory there is a listing for FCC Attorneys (all associated with private firms, including Wiley Rein).

At least you cleared up the airhead assertion that this is an imaginary specialization that does not exist. Thanks.

BTW: Good going on landing a position at WR.

[Anonymous User]

This thread is hilarious.

The OP did feature a question of sorts, though a clearer OP with actual questions (with questions marks and all) might have elicited better responses.

Still, I don't get how people who have admitted to being unfamilar with that field can confidently assert that the OP is using the term "FC attorney" erronously. Industries have their jargons, and they don't always make sense to "outsiders."

EDIT: I just saw the T14 (aborted) thread. It explains a lot of what is going on here actually. Clearly you haven't made a lot of friends with that one.

[Heartford]

This thread is hilarious.

The OP did feature a question of sorts, though a clearer OP with actual questions (with questions marks and all) might have elicited better responses.

Still, I don't get how people who have admitted to being unfamilar with that field can confidently assert that the OP is using the term "FC attorney" erronously. Industries have their jargons, and they don't always make sense to "outsiders."

EDIT: I just saw the T14 (aborted) thread. It explains a lot of what is going on here actually. Clearly you haven't made a lot of friends with that one.

It's funny how the only person who will stand up for OP feels s/he has to abuse the anon feature to do so.

[CanuckObserver]

OP, you seem strangely obsessed with "FCC Attorneys".

A post of yours from last month:

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 8#p4614538

Due to family ties, I had a bird’s eye view of the inner workings of what the street calls FCC Attorneys (these attorneys do not work for the government, but rather interact with the FCC). They hammer out the negotiations between the Buyer and Seller (everything from Letter of Intent, non-disclosure, due-diligence, etc., to the actual Asset Purchase Agreement). Rarely do they ever litigate (when litigation is necessary they often bring in litigators).

The big fees (usually 4-5% of the deal) are secured through negotiating contracts. Even simple contracts generate a hefty fee. My uncle use to say, without the attorneys we would have this deal done by tomorrow, everyone apparently has accepted a delay for attorney fee generation!

I imagine that there is a fair amount of mundane work, such as keeping clients appraised of changing FCC rules, regs, etc.

To me, this is a BigLaw question since some of the largest firms have a communications division, That said, there are a number of smaller firms and solo practitioners dedicated to this field. Either way, I cannot imagine that a +40 hour work week is standard.

Given this economy I am relieved that I am an OP, rather than someone coming out of law school today, given that the credit market needs to be in good shape for deals to transpire. There are still big deals occurring, just not as many.

Since there is little (that I can find on TLS) regarding communications law (or FCC attorneys), anything you can add would be appreciated!

(Yes, I just registered today and this is my first post, but I have been lurking for a long time.)

[Anonymous User]

Amazing thread :) Let me add my anonymous weight to the posters above. For what it's worth, I'm in a well-known DC communications practice (not Wiley) and I've never heard the term "FCC attorney" applied to anyone who doesn't work for the commission.

My best guess, assuming the OP isn't messing with us, is that maybe some minor subset of communications clients outside of DC--maybe a subset who is relatively unsophisticated about communications law and lawyers--use the term "FCC attorneys" to describe the folks who handle their occassional commission-related issues. Honestly, this sounds very idiosyncratic. If true, it only occurs in a very tiny part of communications practice. In my own experience--and as everyone else emphasized--the OP's wording would mislead or confuse the vast majority of communications lawyers.

[NYC Law]

(Yes, I just registered today and this is my first post, but I have been lurking for a long time.)

No worries, being Canadian discredits you more than being new.

[CanuckObserver]

(Yes, I just registered today and this is my first post, but I have been lurking for a long time.)

No worries, being Canadian discredits you more than being new.

*shrug*

I am not here to try to lend credibility; I am only here for the lol's when ATL is slow (or there are too many Staci entries).

[Renne Walker]

Still, I don't get how people who have admitted to being unfamilar with that field can confidently assert that the OP is using the term "FC attorney" erronously. Industries have their jargons, and they don't always make sense to "outsiders."

Well said.

If not so rushed today I would link more, but this will clear it up (it will not, but it should). As you correctly suggested, industries have their own lingo, thus the reference, FCC Attorneys. Note, none of the firms noted on the link are concomitant to the government (or the commission).
--LinkRemoved--

[NYC Law]

http://www.lawyers.com/Communications-A ... firms.html

They're Communications Attorneys. FCC Attorney for an attorney not working for the FCC is just retarded.

[Heartford]

Amazing thread Let me add my anonymous weight to the posters above. For what it's worth, I'm in a well-known DC communications practice (not Wiley) and I've never heard the term "FCC attorney" applied to anyone who doesn't work for the commission.

My best guess, assuming the OP isn't messing with us, is that maybe some minor subset of communications clients outside of DC--maybe a subset who is relatively unsophisticated about communications law and lawyers--use the term "FCC attorneys" to describe the folks who handle their occassional commission-related issues. Honestly, this sounds very idiosyncratic. If true, it only occurs in a very tiny part of communications practice. In my own experience--and as everyone else emphasized--the OP's wording would mislead or confuse the vast majority of communications lawyers.

I applaud your correct use of the anon feature, and also the lulziness you just contributed to this ridiculous thread.

[Anonymous User]

Since you once worked at Wiley Rein you might be acquainted with “Doc.” He will tell you, without hesitation, that his media clientele refer to him as their FCC attorney. In the NAB’s media directory there is a listing for FCC Attorneys (all associated with private firms, including Wiley Rein).

At least you cleared up the airhead assertion that this is an imaginary specialization that does not exist. Thanks.

BTW: Good going on landing a position at WR.

Yes, I know Doc. Doc would not say "I am an FCC attorney." First and foremost, he is in the corporate practice, although he does some communications work, so I doubt he would choose to self-identify that way. I think that you may be slightly confused on the duties of most communications attorneys because of your interaction with Doc, who is really more of a transactional attorney. (Wiley does have a ton of attorneys who practice exclusively before the FCC.)

I agree entirely with Heartford's assessment. I would advise Renne to use the term "communications attorney" if he wants to deal with FCC-related matters at Wiley or any related firm.

(please don't out me, mods, thanks)

[Renne Walker]

Yes, I know Doc. Doc would not say "I am an FCC attorney."

Instead of speaking for Doc, why not just ask him? Let me know how that works out for you.

Doc, who is really more of a transactional attorney.

Agreed. Meaning that he works directly with media owners about buy/sell [APA] agreements.

I agree entirely with Heartford's assessment.

Which is . . . I think you're probably just imagining a legal specialization that doesn't exactly exist. But on the other hand, Google disagrees.

[CanuckObserver]

Yes, I know Doc. Doc would not say "I am an FCC attorney."

Instead of speaking for Doc, why not just ask him? Let me know how that works out for you.

Doc, who is really more of a transactional attorney.

Agreed. Meaning that he works directly with media owners about buy/sell [APA] agreements.

I agree entirely with Heartford's assessment.

Which is . . . I think you're probably just imagining a legal specialization that doesn't exactly exist. But on the other hand, Google disagrees.

Are you seriously relying on Google as your "proof"?


Let me guess, you entered "FCC Attorney" as your terms? Did you bother to actually follow any of the results to see how any of the lawyers actually described themselves?

[Heartford]

ITT: Google proves that things exist.

[Renne Walker]

Let me guess, you entered "FCC Attorney" as your terms? Did you bother to actually follow any of the results to see how any of the lawyers actually described themselves?

At least the questions are becoming easier to answer. Just try and keep up. Because the FCC attorneys list themselves as FCC attorneys, Google/Bing in turn refers to them as FCC attorneys. I am pretty certain Google did not take it upon themselves to call them something other than how they listed their profession.

[NYC Law]

ITT: Google proves that things exist.

FTFY

[wiseowl]

tap dancing Christ in a sidecar at this thread

[CanuckObserver]

Let me guess, you entered "FCC Attorney" as your terms? Did you bother to actually follow any of the results to see how any of the lawyers actually described themselves?

At least the questions are becoming easier to answer. Just try and keep up. Because the FCC attorneys list themselves as FCC attorneys, Google/Bing in turn refers to them as FCC attorneys. I am pretty certain Google did not take it upon themselves to call them something other than how they listed their profession.

Do you know how google search terms work?

You did not answer my question: did you follow the results through? Keywords to allow people (often laypeople) find lawyers who practice in certain areas =\= how they describe themselves professionally. It would actually be incredibly stupid for a lawyer who is NOT employed by the FCC to describe themselves as an "FCC Attorney."

By the way, the first hit in Google is...the actual FCC Attorney Honors Program. nice job removing that from your results!


I have a hard time believing you are legit.

[Jack Smirks]

Ok just to be sure I googled "FCC Attorneys" and sure enough this thread was on the first page of results confirming that private attorneys who do work with the FCC are actually called "FCC Attorneys". If it was on a google results page we know the information can be trusted. Therefore, OP is correct.

[CanuckObserver]

ITT: Google proves that things exist.

FTFY

But...do they work for the government?

[Heartford]

ITT: Google proves that things exist.

FTFY

But...do they work for the government?

Unicorn Lawyers don't work for unicorns. They're private lawyers who exclusively do unicorn work, but not for unicorns. Rather, they represent clients who have dealings or disputes with unicorns, and there is enough of this unicorn work around that Unicorn Lawyers don't do anything but unicorn work, which is why they prefer to pigeonhole themselves as Unicorn Lawyers, instead of a broader term like Magical Animal Attorneys. They think Unicorn Lawyers are really cool, and decided before they started at NYUnicorn Law School that they would focus exclusively upon becoming Unicorn Lawyers. Lawyers who work for unicorns call themselves, "Lawyers who work for Unicorns," and never "Unicorn Lawyers."