Meet the Duo Behind the Uber of Virtual Law Firms
Virtual law firms have become popular in the 2000s, but the formation of Beeman Muchmore this week feels like something new: a virtual firm combined with a microspecialty IP practice.
June 05, 2020 at 05:35 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this report was published on the biweekly IP briefing Skilled in the Art.
Virtual law firms have become popular in the 2000s, but the formation of Beeman Muchmore this week feels like something new: a virtual firm combined with a microspecialty intellectual property practice. In this case it's resolving licensing disputes over enterprise resource planning software.
"It's a gig law phenomenon," says Art Beeman, one of the firm's principals along with Joel Muchmore.
"Gig law" is not meant to demean or devalue the work, Beeman says. The stakes can be enormous when businesses and their software providers get crosswise over licenses. But the disputes tend to recur throughout the market, and Beeman and Muchmore have a lot of experience with them, including the only known instance of an ERP dispute that ended up in court.
"We came to appreciate what's going on in the market, and we believe we're responding to the market in the most effective way possible," Beeman says.
Beeman and Muchmore are IP veterans who practiced together at Crowell & Moring, Arent Fox, and SNR Dentons. Beeman has also logged stints at Jones Day, DLA Piper and other firms.
In 2015 the two filed a suit for the Mars food company against Oracle, seeking a declaration that Mars had complied with the audit provisions in its 1993 software licensing agreement, and an injunction preventing Oracle from terminating the license. The case settled a few months later.
"It got some attention, and before we knew it we were getting phone calls," Beeman says.
With their experience—and a database of how key license terms have been construed by vendors in other circumstances—Beeman says they can provide context, information and leverage, with the goal of "extricating" clients from the dispute.
"It's at the very least going to be a lot of fun," Beeman says. "The times, they are a-changin."
This content has been archived.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 AllPre-Internet High Court Ruling Hobbling Efforts to Keep Tech Giants from Using Below-Cost Pricing to Bury Rivals
6 minute readAs AI-Generated Fraud Rises, Financial Companies Face a Long Cybersecurity Battle
'A Never-Ending Nightmare': Apple Sued for Alleged Failure to Protect Child Sexual Abuse Survivors
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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