“Not as painful as sitting through a continuing legal education lecture, the idea seems to be to pop some recent IP events or decisions on the guests and let them briefly discuss how they think a court's analysis would go given applicable legal tests and doctrine. In other words, they make educated guesses regarding whether you are breaking the law. Should be interesting! Instead it's terrible. Not all lawyers are horrid at making presentations, but this troupe clearly feels minimal prep is acceptable. On the positive side, they have an element of spontaneity where they think through the legal analysis. But why is that all we get from this podcast? The end product is something not as interesting to listen to as it is (I'm sure) intellectually rewarding to create.”Read full review »
Ecadman via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
03/05/09