The ABA is running its annual law blog popularity contest, and Patently-O again made the cut of top 100 legal blogs. Apparently, Patently-O is being voted on for the award of best “niche” blog. Unfortunately, I tend to avoid that word (niche) because I don’t want to sound too French (neesh) or too rural (nitch).
Follow the link to Vote for Patently-O (towards the bottom of the ballet) http://www.abajournal.com/blawgs/blawg100_2008/niche. (Only one vote per computer).
Dan you didn’t even tell us which blog is yours.
It’s PO by a landslide!
said, but not well said Dan,
Come on, give me at least a little reason to venture over to your blog, spend a little time and perhaps vote for you…
Just voted for you, in large part in thanks that you are not in my category this year. For some reason I’ve moved from niche (I was a French major, so I proudly pronounce it neesh) to “regional,” whatever the hell that means. Anyway, seeing as how it looks like you have run away in your category, I am just here trolling for votes and hoping to catch a bit of your dust. link to abajournal.com
“But I’m not hopeful about the effect of these efforts. I think a more realistic hope is that the patent system loses its newfound public visibility, and that all of the folks who really aren’t interested in it – and who just want to tear it down for their own amusement – shift their attention to other pursuits.”
David, I think that your “more realistic hope” is a bit naive. The patent system’s “newfound” visibility isn’t just a fad, and those who are interested aren’t in it for their amusement. The patent system’s visibility is directly related to how lucrative the system is for patent professionals, litigators, corporations, and the like. Interest isn’t going to fade unless the system becomes less economically important. Is that really what you want?
Dear weary lexicographer,
Once again I find myself in full agreement with you and Ralph.
link to bartleby.com
MaxDrei wrote:
“Is the public in the USA anti-IPR?”
I think the general public is now anti-copyright (thanks to lots of irresponsible tactics by the content industry), but is generally neutral on trademark.
In patent law, attitudes differ by practice area. “Low-tech” patenting in the mechanical, electrical, and chemical arts is tolerated without comment. Our biotech companies suffer much less public animosity than in the EU (in patenting as well as other areas – e.g., genetically modified crops aren’t as sensitive an issue as over on your side of the pond.)
Unfortunately, the field of software is crowded with a lot of anti-patent zealots who oppose the entire notion of IP on philosophical grounds. Not conicidentally, most of these folks would love to see every closed-source software company burn to the ground, even if that meant losing a decade of progress. And in waging that battle, they’d be happy to wreck the patent system – because, frankly, neither patent law nor business realities are of much concern or interest to them.
Business method patents have a negative stigma in most sectors.
===
“Are you advocating that we IPR folks retreat deeper into our crevice (otherwise called niche), and let the ignorant public legislate the bite out of IPR?”
Not at all – I think we need to keep up our efforts to inform/remind the public (and *ahem* the CAFC) of the practical value of IP protection.
But I’m not hopeful about the effect of these efforts. I think a more realistic hope is that the patent system loses its newfound public visibility, and that all of the folks who really aren’t interested in it – and who just want to tear it down for their own amusement – shift their attention to other pursuits.
– David Stein
“I tend to avoid that word (niche) because I don’t want to sound too French (neesh) or too rural (nitch).”
Personally I pronounce it like “Nietzsche” so that people think I’m an intellectual.
“Consistency and predictability are hobgoblins of little minds.”
Actually, it’s consistency and predictability that let us go to bed at night knowing that the sun will probably come up again and that our ATM cards will probably still work tomorrow. It’s a foolish consistency that is the hobgoblin of little minds.
Cheer up Dennis, it’s better to be classified as “niche” than “quirky.”
Dear Mr. Morgan,
I totally agree. I wonder how many of those great old law firms are left? Finnegan comes to mind. How about up your way?
The patent area lends itself to “boutique” practice because all practices are, or at least can be (and probably should be), different and depend heavily on the individual technology areas, markets, the agenda of the client corporations or individuals, and the individual practice habits of the attorneys involved and relationships between them and individual histories as members of their firms.
Unfortunately, when pointed haired bosses don’t have a clue (as they usually don’t) as to what they are doing, but know (because they heard) that “IPRs” are something important, they tend to want to try to see everything as the same and want the same thing as the guy down the street, which tends to create the false appearance of commoditization in the profession.
Like Mr. Stein, I look forward with delight to the day the profession returns to the niche that it actually is and should be. Shouldn’t be long.
Unfortunately, nowadays there is a perception that everything (and everybody) is fungible and can and should be commoditized including legal practice. The commoditize-at-all-costs attitude suits the global conglomerate mindset but is wrongheaded because it comes from a place of ignorance and expediency (and ironically will always eventually lead to greater costs for the corporation – although greater costs may actually be the intent since greater costs lead to bigger budgets).
Despite the machinations however, no two legal cases or legal scenarios will or should ever be the same. No two lawyers or law firms will or should ever be the same.
Consistency and predictability are hobgoblins of little minds.
Question for David Stein. Is the public in the USA anti-IPR? The public in Europe (unlike that in Japan) has a negative view of IPR, seeing it as denying it its right to life-saving drugs, free music and cheap goods. So, in Europe, the IPR community knows it needs to “reach out” to the pig-ignorant public (including, sad to say, the journalists), and help it to gain even a minimal grasp of where we would all be without IPR. Ostrich head-dipping in the sand is “not an option”, at least in Europe. Are you advocating that we IPR folks retreat deeper into our crevice (otherwise called niche), Mr Stein, and let the ignorant public legislate the bite out of IPR?
Does “Mooney” rhyme with “annoying id1ot?”
David Stein is my new hero.
I totally agree that getting a little (unwanted) attention in your practice area leads to sudden onset of everyone becoming a “patent expert” or similar wannabe along with the accompanying gratuitous intermeddling.
Its like Y2K. Right up until December 30, 1999, there was an unprecedented increase in the number of people calling themselves Y2K “specialists.”
Someone should do a study on this ugly social phenomenon.
“Niche” does not bother me – but “boutique” does. It makes great old IP firms that have not yet been swallowed up by giant GP “law factories” sound like they are flower shops.
“I tend to avoid that word (niche) because I don’t want to sound too French (neesh) or too rural (nitch).”
Fascinating.
Does “Crouch” rhyme with “couch” or “pooch”?
I’m gussing that in Chicago, it rhymed with “coach.”
Whoa, whoa, whoa! What’s wrong with being a “niche?”
The cultural chic-ness of the patent system in the late 1990’s led to raised visibility… which, not coincidentally, prompted every ninny on the planet to weigh in with half-baked ideas on how to “fix” the patent system. This led to paternalistic intrusion into patent law by Congress, the Supreme Court, and anti-patent radicals with unrealistic chicken-little fears about the patent system… all of which has warped the IP system into an unworkable mess!
Do you see the public playing “bull in a china shop” with other “niches” of law, like tax law, environmental law, or product liability? Nope… they’re pretty much static and well-settled, and practitioners can quietly implement a well-tended body of law.
Please, Santa… for Christmas this year, please bring me back a “niche” perception of my practice area!
– David Stein
Comments are closed.