![Featured book book image](http://www.lawbizblog.com/I"m proud to say that San Bernardino County Law Library is featuring my recent book on its site.....jpg)
Knowledge - Who Owns It?
I had the pleasure of keynoting a recent conference sponsored by LexisNexis. During a panel discussion among practitioners, technology consultant and myself, the topic of the cost of new technology was discussed. One of the suggestions I made was that the successful law firm of the future will use technology to create and enhance its effort at knowledge management. The firm that is able to retrieve its pre-existing knowledge and use it again will be more efficient, reduce its costs and therefore provide excellent results for clients at a lower price.
Then, the question arises: Who owns the knowledge, who owns the forms, the precedent knowledge? Does the client who paid for it own it? Does the law firm own it? Or does the lawyer who created it own it? This becomes more important in an age of greater lateral movement.
Some clients have as a condition of engagement that they (the client) own the intellectual property ... and that the law firm must share it with other law firms who handle the client's affairs (e.g., product liability litigation) in other parts of the country.
Do you have a firm policy on this? What do you do concerning your intellectual property when a lawyer leaves your firm? Is your policy different when the lawyer is a partner as contrasted to when the lawyer is an associate?
http://www.lawbizblog.com/admin/trackback/203764
Who owns knowledge? It is an important question that can cause problems in the internet age.
Under UK copyright law, written works generated by employees such as articles, templates or reports would typically be seen as "literary" works. If such works were created "in the course of employment" they would belong to the employer (subject to a contract to the contrary). Hence, the law firm would typically own the knowledge.
However, what happens when the knowledge comprises factual information or work-support materials? What happens when a lawyer moves positions or a client requests use of knowledge documents they partly funded? Although legally correct, is it morally correct to use copyright law to deny the lawyer or the client use of the material?
The issue becomes further clouded when using materials that can be replicated thousandfold by a click of a button on a computer or a photocopier.
Facts cannot be copyrighted or sequestered. But, weaving facts into a document or creating a unique approach to solving a problem suggested by the facts can be.
A "work for hire" is property belonging to the client, despite their allowing the law firm to retain it. But, I don't think an individual lawyer can step into the same shoes ...
And I'm not sure how morality vs the law is an issue.
Thanks for furthering the conversation. I look forward to your further thoughts ... And please do join us at www.lawbizforum.com to raise this issue with even more lawyers. Thanks.