Here's the problem: the law of quickly diminishing returns.<p>Recently I've tried to "learn more" about one specific IP issue: what are the rules for Intellectual Property developed while being employed by someone but outside of work and not using employer's equipment?<p>I've read very informative discussion on <a href="http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422" rel="nofollow">http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/19422</a>, including authoritative-sounding response from Joel Spolsky and frankly, I don't think that in terms of knowledge I can act on with confidence about what the final outcome will be, I'm any smarter than I was before I've read it.<p>The bottom line seems to be: technically the company that employs me owns any IP I do during employment but if you're lucky you're not going to be sued.<p>And that seems to apply more generically: in most cases you can use your common sense (don't use other people's trademarks, don't write code for your future company at your current workplace etc.) but when things get contentious, it's anyone's guess what the final outcome will be.<p>I've got code to write and the time spent reading books on IP law (which is part of the advice that this article gives) is time not spent writing software.<p>What I need is not a book or 50 blog posts but a "1 day guide" to the most important issues which provides bottom-line advice and not only "this is what theoretically might happen" but "this is how it usually works out" (e.g. in the context of "who owns the IP developed during employment" the theoretical advice is "employer, so don't even think about bootstrapping your startup in your free time" but practical advice is "technically employer, but it's virtually unheard of employers suing ex-employees and many do it, so keep things quiet and bootstrap anyway").
I can't remember where, but I believe I heard a Linus Torvald quote to the effect that open source developers should <i>not</i> research potential patent infringement for applications they're developing.<p>I would boldly extend this to the claim that no should 'learn about ip' while they are developing. IP is essentially protection racket. Sure you can learn a little bit of the dance but it won't unless you're on of the 'big boys'. In the end, there's no great difference between between a patent troll and a corporation seen as having 'legitimate ip'. IP rackets resemble <i>states</i> in the sense that they are gangs trying to suck the fattest t<i></i>t they can find.<p>The best strategy isn't to "know what's legal" but to <i>avoid attention</i> `till you're big enough to kick the snot out of these bandits.<p>IP mavens are [INSERT SOCIALLY DIMINISHING ADJECTIVE HERE].
I realize I'm a bit biased with my comment, but frankly, I think law school is great for any entrepreneur. In fact, I attended law school specifically because I wanted to return to startup world. The analysis methods taught in law school are invaluable to life as an entrepreneur. That I now have an understanding of the law is a pretty cool bonus.
Very important. As a lawyer and startup founder I find it really interesting that IP law isn't mentioned more on blogs/hacker sites/ etc because it is very important, especially the TM aspect. Perhaps it's because most startups fail or never get big enough to run in to these issues?