If you want to practice tech law (non-IP) with a computer science undergrad degree after a T14 law school, in biglaw... Forum

[will81999]

Should you have a plan B option law specialty?

[Anonymous User]

Should you have a plan B option law specialty?

I'm an IP lawyer, so take what I say with a grain of salt. As you can probably already tell, there are far fewer tech law lawyers than IP lawyers in biglaw. That means that you'll be gunning for a much smaller subset of jobs. Anecdotally, my V20 has a huge IP/IP lit group, but hardly any tech lawyers. We routinely recruit IP prospects hard, but I haven't seen the firm put any additional effort into tech law prospects. And IP lawyers are super high in demand. I had a very easy time getting offers in IP from my T14, but I'm sure it would have been harder if I was gunning for a job in non-IP positions. Even if you get a 2L summer associate gig at a firm with a tech law group, there's no guarantee there will be an opening in that group when you join, so you might get forced into IP law or some other specialty.

Lawyers are almost all inherently risk averse. So my $0.02 is that when it comes to interviewing for 2L summer associate jobs, you should locate the top tech law groups in the cities you would want to live in, bid those at the top of your list with tech-law focused resume/cover letter, but also include a short list of some safer IP firms/groups with IP focused resumes. If you swing and miss at billing yourself out as a tech law prospect, you'll still have something to fall back on.

Given the relatively lower number of tech law attorneys, I think it's harder for tech law groups to hire laterals when they need them. There just aren't as many candidates. Speaking from experience, I've received some tech law focused recruiting emails geared toward retooling IP attorneys. That means there's always the possibility of switching specialties a year or two after you graduate when tech law groups in your area needs a new associate.

As always, the best thing you can do right now (or when you're in law school) is to network. TLS is okay for some basic advice, but if you know what you want to do then go after it. Set up calls/coffee with tech lawyers from your school (UG or law school) and ask them how they broke into the field. Ask about what makes a candidate desirable and how you can set yourself up for success. Show some genuine interest in the field and recent developments. All that will be far more helpful than any nuanced bidding strategy for OCI.

[stupididiot]

Depends what you mean by "tech law." Tech transactions? capital markets? privacy/compliance?

[Anonymous User]

Depends what you mean by "tech law." Tech transactions? capital markets? privacy/compliance?

I was assuming something like privacy/compliance. Agree if it's tech transactions then OP has no reason to worry.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Depends what you mean by "tech law." Tech transactions? capital markets? privacy/compliance?

It's like international law but for tech instead of international

[trmckenz]

Working in an IP group can be your plan B. It is easy to get a job as an IP lawyer if you are eligible for the patent bar. That is where your CS background is most valuable to law firms. Most law firms will expect / push you to join their IP group unless you express strong interest in another group. So be prepared to explain why you do not want to do IP.

If you're interested in working with tech companies generally, but not committed to IP, you should target firms that are based in Silicon Valley and other firms that represent early stage companies. Think Cooley, WSGR, Fenwick, Gunderson, Goodwin, etc. to start. Most of these firms have offices throughout the country.

I too am interested to hear what "tech law" means to OP. The world outside of IP is broad -- transactional, litigation, regulatory / advisory...

Source: I am an EE that now does transactional work.

[Anonymous User]

One thing about tech transactions practices, try to make sure you are in a practice where you are doing tech transactions deal rather than being M&A support. This definitely exists in the firms that people have named (e.g., Cooley, Fenwick, Gunderson, etc.) whereas I think it tends to be less prevalent in large New York firms with large M&A practices (e.g., Cravath, Sullivan & Cromwell, STB, etc.). All that being said, tech transactions isn't a huge practice area because (i) a lot of tech transactions are handled in-house and (ii) on average, tech transactions tends to be smaller than their M&A brethren. Tech transactions though is probably the best practice area if you want to move in-house quickly. If in-house is your plan, tech transactions plus some privacy work in a law firm is a good path.