Tech Company Lawyers to Get Real—and Funny—at Open Mic Night
The Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy at New York University School of Law has solicited harrowing workplace tales from in-house lawyers at tech companies and hired actors to perform them as monologues during the Nov. 18 Legal Madness open mic night.
November 04, 2019 at 11:45 AM
4 minute read
|
What really happens inside legal departments at tech companies?
Client confidentiality means the truth rarely goes public, but an upcoming open mic night in New York City aims to shed light on the realities of being a lawyer in the go-go realm of tech, where things move fast and corporate conventions don't always apply.
The Engelberg Center on Innovation Law & Policy at New York University School of Law on Nov. 18 is hosting Legal Madness, a night of monologues based entirely on the harrowing workplace tales of in-house lawyers at tech companies. But lawyers themselves aren't getting on stage and giving up the goods on their current or former employers. Rather, organizers have hired actors to deliver short monologues based on stories submitted anonymously by lawyers in the legal departments of tech companies.
"We have scenarios about dealing with nonlegal requests that come into your office," said Engelberg Center executive director Michael Weinberg. "We have scenarios dealing with people having sex on the roof. We have scenarios where you get bizarre and cryptic comments from your CEO, and you try to figure out how to make them happen. Understanding what to do when something goes wrong at the company, and everyone is looking for someone to make a decision and the legal department ends up being the ones willing to do that. We have a whole range of things."
The idea for Legal Madness came from Weinberg's conversations with Engelberg Center fellow Sarah Feingold. Each had been general counsel at one or more tech companies—he at 3-D printing outfit Shapeways and she at Etsy—and they had heard plenty of wild stories over the years from fellow tech company lawyers. But due to confidentiality rules, those stories never traveled beyond friends. Making the stories anonymous and performed by actors would allow in-house attorneys to share their most eyebrow-raising experiences, while also giving people a dose of reality about what it's like to fill that role, they reasoned. And the happenings within the legal department often provide a look into the heart of these largely opaque technology companies, Weinberg added. Plus, the stories are funny—as long as you aren't the lawyer in them.
"We think it will be a fun show. We want people to come out and enjoy it," Weinberg said. "But it's also a way for people who are not inside one of these companies to understand what it's like and the kinds of things you have to juggle when you are working in a legal department inside of a tech company. It does have this sort of documentary and educational role. Maybe it's a cautionary tale. Maybe it's a big inviting sign that says: 'These are the kinds of problems I want to try to figure out how to deal with.' It depends on the person."
It turns out that plenty of in-house tech lawyers wanted a chance to open up. The center reached out to contacts asking for their stories, and received more submissions than they could perform onstage. Attorneys could submit their stories via a form or could leave a voice mail. Organizers selected about 20 stories—ranging from 15 seconds to seven minutes—and have cast actors to deliver the monologues. Weinberg said the auditioning actors were initially confused about what, precisely, they were to perform.
Many of the submissions involved human resources-related issues, but the show includes just a few of them in an effort to represent the wide array of issues, legal and otherwise, that in-house attorneys all called on to resolve at tech companies. Organizers hope that a successful first run of Legal Madness will lead to more performances, and an even greater willingness of in-house tech lawyers to share their war stories.
While attorneys in the audience of Legal Madness will no doubt sympathize with their counterparts in the stories, Weinberg said even nonlawyers will find the show funny. Even better, tech CEOs would find it extremely eye-opening, he said.
"If I'm a tech CEO, it's going to give me as unvarnished an insight into what's happening in that legal department as I could possibly get."
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFormer Rutgers Law School Dean Replaces Hoffman as University General Counsel on Interim Basis
4 minute readAs Student Workers Unionize in Droves, NLRB Tries to Prevent Colleges' Privacy Concerns From Slowing Momentum
5 minute readDemise of Chevron Deference Likely Played a Major Role in Successful Title IX Challenges, Experts Say
4 minute readHarvard Hires Ex-Defense Department GC as Legal Chief at Tumultuous Time
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250