Sean O’Connor, a UW Law Professor, writes brilliantly and concisely about the value lawyers bring to entrepreneurs and the innovation pipeline through their ability to structure and document deals. In his chapter in “Handbook on Law, Innovation and Growth,” edited by the Kauffman Foundation’s Robert E. Litan, Prof. O’Connor notes that while the existence of patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret law form the fundamental tools in the box, these are legal structures established by government and merely applied by lawyers.  Of course, knowledge of intellectual property law and possessing skills to help entrepreneurs and innovators gain access to IP legal regimes are crucial. But, Prof. O’Connor points out, innovators and entrepreneurs spend more of their productive lives in the “private ordering legal environment,” one filled with corporate structures and contracts. There are numerous established forms of contracts, and provisions that become the meat and potatoes of most standard IP licensing agreements or employment contracts.  In between the standard terms, however, are nuanced choices guided by skilled transactional attorneys who can play with variations on themes to find the sweet spot that gets a deal done. Prof. O’Connor’s work in creating an environment at UW Law for law students to work with sophisticated start-up transactions is a model for other schools to follow.

A recent article in the ABA Journal discusses the role of the US Department of Education in helping law students get deep into debt they are increasingly less likely to repay given the depressed job market for recent law graduates. It is sobering. So is the notion that law schools may have to demonstrate that their degrees result in jobs:

“One plausible outcome has the Education Department using its accreditation authority to force law schools to demonstrate, as a condition of receiving federal loan money, a minimum threshold of employability and income upon graduation.”

Higher education is no longer the guaranteed path to wealth or even job stability it once used to be. That this is true of legal education shouldn’t be a huge surprise. Many law students are seeking shelter from the bad job market that faced them after acquiring their undergraduate degree, so law schools are enrolling a large number of people who have already struggled to stay employed. Compound that with the shift in what clients expect from lawyers, what law firms expect from young associates, and what we all seem to expect will be our guaranteed lifestyle, and there is much disappointment and frustration.

We are addressing those issues one student at a time, something we can do at one of the smallest law schools in America. Just yesterday I got a call from someone at the US Patent & Trademark Office offering to personally track down the applications of Maine Law graduates that may have been lost in the system to make sure they get considered if not hired by the agency. Another friend who hires contract lawyers to do e-discovery talked to me for an hour about training our recent graduates in the latest document review technology so they will be competitive for contract work in the near term, and for entry-level litigation positions as well. This would be exclusive for our students. Employers are hiring our students for internships out of loyalty to our school even if their general counsel didn’t go here. One of the things about Maine is that people love the state, and by extension love the law school. So we have friends willing to help our students one by one, which is the way it should be.

I’ve just learned of a disturbing trend whereby law firms send glossy brochures not to clients, but to recent law school graduates they assume are hanging out a shingle given the dearth of law firm jobs presently. These firms, who are reluctant to hire these same young lawyers and train them, are offering to help them (for a fee) when they get over their heads.

Gone are the days when law firms assumed first and second year associates required residency, apprenticeship, mentorship and training, and structured their finances and partnership tracks to accommodate those years. Now, young lawyers are chided for being unable to function at the highest levels and law firms complain that their clients won’t pay the billable fees of the newest associates, making laterals more compelling than recent law school grads.  These recent law school grads with their large loans must do what they can to survive, including taking on clients if they can. If the law firms who seek fees from these young solo practitioners would spend their marketing money on hiring and training them, instead of taking advantage of their inexperience, the clients would be better served as would the legal profession. True, we law schools can do a better job providing students with skills they need to handle matters on their own, but no amount of clinical training or cooperative externship programs will replace supervised practice in a law firm or government agency. Instead of cannibalizing these young lawyers, more experienced lawyers should take them in.  After all, someone did that for them years ago.

A recent article in the ABA Journal discusses the role of the US Department of Education in helping law students get deep into debt they are increasingly less likely to repay given the depressed job market for recent law graduates. It is sobering. So is the notion that law schools may have to demonstrate that their degrees result in jobs:

“One plausible outcome has the Education Department using its accreditation authority to force law schools to demonstrate, as a condition of receiving federal loan money, a minimum threshold of employability and income upon graduation.”

Higher education is no longer the guaranteed path to wealth or even job stability it once used to be. That this is true of legal education shouldn’t be a huge surprise. Many law students are seeking shelter from the bad job market that faced them after acquiring their undergraduate degree, so law schools are enrolling a large number of people who have already struggled to stay employed. Compound that with the shift in what clients expect from lawyers, what law firms expect from young associates, and what we all seem to expect will be our guaranteed lifestyle, and there is much disappointment and frustration.

We are addressing those issues one student at a time, something we can do at one of the smallest law schools in America. Just yesterday I got a call from someone at the US Patent & Trademark Office offering to personally track down the applications of Maine Law graduates that may have been lost in the system to make sure they get considered if not hired by the agency. Another friend who hires contract lawyers to do e-discovery talked to me for an hour about training our recent graduates in the latest document review technology so they will be competitive for contract work in the near term, and for entry-level litigation positions as well. This would be exclusive for our students. Employers are hiring our students for internships out of loyalty to our school even if their general counsel didn’t go here. One of the things about Maine is that people love the state, and by extension love the law school. So we have friends willing to help our students one by one, which is the way it should be.

After ten years, here is what the Center for Law & Innovation does really well: We help law students gain experience with intellectual property law and IP transactions. We help them appreciate how interesting, cautious, vulnerable and fascinating inventors are, and what a deep sense of satisfaction one gets helping an individual understand the legal value and potential of his ideas. Many times, our clients hear disappointing news about the novelty of their creations. It turns out people keep having the same ideas over and over. But our students deliver those messages with compassion and care, grasping that much of legal counseling is teaching others about the law so they can gain a deeper understanding of how to work more effectively with it next time.

Here’s what else we do well: We have a positive impact in the lives of hundreds of Maine citizens every year, whether we help them register a trademark, apply for a patent, negotiate a license agreement, fend off litigation, protect a trade secret, or avoid making a costly mistake. Through all this work, one-on-one and with no meter running, we help them learn to improve their business acumen, understand intellectual property law, and feel valued and celebrated for their entrepreneurial spirit.

Is it ever frustrating? Sure. I wish Maine boasted a thicket of technology innovators and entrepreneurs to rival Cambridge, Boulder or Silicon Valley. What rural state would not want a piece of that? But I have learned that even though economic growth through innovation has not blasted off here since our creation in 2000, we make a difference every day. And that’s very satisfying.