gdp's Comments

Blogger: Login to read : Its a Fickle World

Wed, 26 Oct 2011 05:29:09 +0000

I don't do this very often . . . but I'd like an "amen" from someone who was in the VC class during Fall 2010. The day after Groupon refused Google's acquision offer, I announced to the VC class that "we'll look back about this some day and just laugh." I've just never understood what is protectable about Groupon. They might yet have the last laugh on me. And, yes, the founders have sold more than enough on the secondary markets to endow professor's chair positions at multiple schools. But Groupon feels to me more like a hula hoop fad than a Model T innovation. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Morality Clause for Tennis Players

Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:17:55 +0000

It was a good jiu-jitzu when someone in the ELC mentioned the prospect that the right type of rude behavior would potentially enhance Kid Dynamite's value. On Nasty, there is little doubt that, as Robert Johnson is to the Blues, Ilie Nastase was to boorish tennis behavior. People love to watch the juxtaposition of a sport for "gentlemen" and "ladies" with relentless attacks on norms of civility. Brad From Cliff Richey: The most notorious Bad Boy of us all was without question Ilie Nastase. His nickname was “Nasty” because of the dirty tricks he pulled. I remember one match where he wore a T-shirt under his regular collared shirt and when he got mad at the crowd, he lifted up the first shirt to reveal his T-shirt with a picture of the infamous middle finger. He was literally saying “F you” to the crowd! I really think Nastase enjoyed the carnival atmosphere more than anything else. I think that was his way of escaping the pressure. He would take a situation and make it into something he felt more comfortable with. That way he could pretend he was in control. He won the French Open and the U.S. Open that way. He was known as the Clown Prince of Tennis. Nastase is still a good friend of mine, but there was a time when we didn’t speak to each other for a full year. During one match we played, the base linesman called a foot fault on his serve. Nasty kicked his shoe off at the linesman. I was waiting for him. He pretended that he couldn’t untie the knot to get his shoe back on. I finally said to the umpire, a guy named Hague Twofink, “I’m not putting up with this. The rule says ‘continuous play.’ I’m claiming the match.” I took all my stuff and went back to the locker room. I already started talking to reporters about claiming the match. My host that week, Bernie Koteen, came to get me and said, “You’d better go out there. They’re about to default you.” So I went back out on the court and told Twofink, “I’ll play, but his foot fault stands. He only has one serve left. If he doesn’t put the ball in play within 10 seconds, I’m leaving. I don’t care who you give the match to.” Twofink agreed. He announced that Nastase would have 10 seconds to serve. Nastase refused. The crowd started counting down: “10, 9, 8,” etc. Nasty never put the serve in play and was defaulted.

Blogger: Login to read : Know when to hold \'em

Sun, 9 Oct 2011 23:46:28 +0000

This provides a useful framing (hold em, fold em, run) and a productive set of questions concerning circumstances that militate in favor of one tool (e.g., run) over another (e.g., fold em). One easy maxim which informed my warning on the AAA provision: don't unnecessarily obligate your client (or both parties, for that matter) to something they'll be unlikely to do or, alternatively, something that they probably won't want to do. Beyond that, it gets tougher. It is a a valuable project to keep notes upon since, to my knowledge, there is not a definitive set of answers to this set of questions. One determinant of contract provisions relates to what CAN be known about the future vs. what remains unpredictable. In the literature, there is scholarship on this, including papers on the value of fuzzy rules (e.g., fold 'em). I'm fairly sure that Harry Surden has written some on this area. Dangerous to relay an article that I have not read, but the abstract to this article reflects some of what I have in mind: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_i... Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Exercising in the Library

Sun, 9 Oct 2011 23:30:49 +0000

Delighted to hear of the exercise's utility. I also very much appreciated the constructive approach of each ELC student attorney during last Monday's de-briefing with Dorothy. No one got overly defensive. Everyone "got" the spirit of the exercise. Good start to the semester.

Daily Camera.com: : CU-Boulder students create their own jobs in down economy - Boulder Daily Camera

Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:54:01 +0000

As someone closely involved in CU entrepreneurship, I'm delighted to see Whitney's fine coverage of student entrepreneurs. Happily, it is worth underscoring that these companies are not an accident. Of the companies cited in the article, over ½ exist because of – or were significantly spurred by – business execution classes, the help of centers across the CU-Boulder campus (listed here http://www.boulderstartups.org/about/education/), the New Venture Challenge (see cunvc.org), the Ent Law Clinic (http://www.colorado.edu/law/clinics/entre/), and campus / community interaction such as the New Tech Meetup. In short, these businesses are the result of a burgeoning culture that is spurring innovation on campus. Increasingly, CU is one of the nation's best launch pads for students who want to learn about entrepreneurship, start a business, and connect to a world-class startup community. Brad Brad Bernthal Clinical Professor Colorado Law School Entrepreneurial Law Clinic Samuelson-Glushko Technology Law & Policy Clinic Director of Silicon Flatirons Center's Entrepreneurship Initiative 303.492.0610 Brad.Bernthal@Colorado.edu Best, Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Innovation Conference Recap

Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:23:09 +0000

I have enormous respect for the speaker, Professor Scherer, who made the R&D argument that indicated "federal funding is not necessary to promote innovation." That said, you should know that his position on this is debatable, and IMHO . . . plain wrong. Much of this depends on what is counted as serious R&D within companies. My intuition is that near term R&D far outruns longer term research. Companies can do near term, applied research; companies' time horizons make it hard to invest in basic research. But the fundamental insights are often difficult to rely upon the private sector for. Another issue that caught my attention was from panel #3: to what extent can a country that invests in basic / fundamental research capture the benefits of the research? In an interconnected world, there is strong incentive to free ride on the basic research of others. The discussion of sharing basic research costs through treaties / trade agreements caught my attention. Tough to operationalize but an interesting idea. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : and BOOM goes the Dynamite

Mon, 26 Sep 2011 04:08:47 +0000

Kudos to JD: first time blogger hits what might be my favorite all-time ELC blog subject line. On niceties . . . everyone develops a negotiation style. One item to bear in mind: I've seen plenty of clients irate about attorneys who "blow up the deal" (appropriate for the kid dynamite theme). As JD notes, building a relationship is one of the attorney's objectives in a situation like this, especially where the clients hope to do work together moving forward. To be clear: this should not be mistaken for an excuse to capitulate at each turn. But it does mean that -- if a negotiation starts to go south -- that you're well served to table the item + go back to the client before jeopardizing the relationship yourself. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Founder Vesting on the Techstars TV Show

Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:20:33 +0000

Further to the post above, the Hadzima memo is available here: http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/founders-memo.h... I think it is an excellent set of common sense questions to think through when you're organizing an entity with multiple founders and/or early employees. Worth keeping in your files. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Founder Vesting on the Techstars TV Show

Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:17:02 +0000

Good on-point reference, Dave. There is an excellent, if dated, article by Joe Hadzima that I've assigned in past classes about founder relationships + considerations to think through. I'll circulate to the class as a FYI via email. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Preemptive Strikes in Start-Up Negotiations

Mon, 19 Sep 2011 01:14:52 +0000

Another insight behind the preemptive strike: people are sometimes lazy. If something is done reasonably, and an individual on the other side is busy, then doing someone else's work is often attractive to them. No sense in overplaying this idea -- there are certainly ample instances in which it won't work. But it is powerful to take the first swing and, at times, this is enough to alter the frame to your client's advantage.

Blogger: Login to read : Back in my day, we had real transaction costs.....

Tue, 12 Oct 2010 20:18:56 +0000

Good post. Interesting take on communications circa 1986 as they relate to transaction costs. Dick's innovation was two fold: (i) having a vision for Spatial's technology; and (ii) pulling together a disaggregated, decentralized rock-star group of contributors in the age before the Internet. Another takeaway: Dick was obviously an early adopter of communications technology. We think of the fax as primitive and passe now. But many academics in 1986 would not have seen how the ability to flip reams of paper at low cost could create a new approach to technological development. Another early adopter of communications technology did well in the retail market: Sam Walnut. Walmart put its own satellite up to give in a communications advantage which paid off well. Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Garcia\'s Law: Git Er Done

Wed, 8 Sep 2010 03:17:33 +0000

It's a false bifurcation. Rowan's law is about individual ownership which drives a determination that a mission will be completed. It may well be that, in transactional work, "completion" requires hyper-technical virtuosity or perhaps just the brute force of a lot of hours. It certainly does not represent cutting corners to create risk for the client or oneself. To me, more than anything, Towan's law is a about avoiding a certain common habit which you'll soon see in practice if you have not already: plausible deniability. Certain people are excellent to work with because they will do everything in their power to make the overall operation better for their participation. Others are to be avoided because they constantly seek reasons why the operation's shortcomings are not their fault (no one asked me to do it" "How was I to know that?" etc.). A key reason to the ELC's success in recent years is that we've had a high percentage of individuals who ask, "How can I make this better? Where can I make a contribution?" And then they do the work. We saw this spirit of effectiveness last year on the New Venture Challenge Ex Board, too. To me, these are the Rowan-types that you want to have as your attorney, your trusted adviser, and your partner on any venture worth the while.

Blogger: Login to read : Garcia\'s Law: Git Er Done

Fri, 3 Sep 2010 00:39:44 +0000

Love the idea of a law here. But I think it should be "Rowan's Law" since he was the improvisational adventurer who delivered the message. If so, Rowan's Law is shorthand for a spirit of determination as it intersects with creativity and effectiveness.

one : Luncheon with Jared Polis

Mon, 23 Aug 2010 16:22:24 +0000

It is certainly correct that software as an industry sector faces fewer regulatory frictions than cleantech and bio -- especially in the way of barriers to entry. But there are regulatory issues which will have significant consequences for software: net neutrality, broadband build-out, Colorado's tax on software, and software patents are salient issues worth paying attention to. One concern that is too little discussed around net neutrality is the potential effect of regulation -- even if intended to help software start-ups -- which could bring software issues more regularly within the regulatory ambit.

Feld Thoughts : Senator Mark Udall Co-Sponsors The Startup Visa Act of 2010

Tue, 20 Jul 2010 04:34:47 +0000

This is encouraging. The United States should be doing everything possible to attract the world' best and brightest innovative minds. Existing policy frictions today for A+ talent that want to reside in the United States, if not remedied soon, is an awful blunder that we'll collectively shake our heads at in 20 years (if not sooner). The start-up visa proposal is easy to get behind: a boost to economic competitiveness, wealth creation, and American vitality.

Blogger: Login to read : More on Net Neutrality and the FCC

Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:47:40 +0000

Thoughtful post, Nicole. Three thoughts: 1. On the jx power issue, Brand X remains the most important case. In it, the USSC held that a cable ISP is a Title I "information service." The FCC has relied on its ancillary jurisdiction so far. Frankly, I don't even think Comcast wants the D.C. Circuit to find a lack of FCC jx over the Internet. If the FCC loses on ancillary jurisdiction grounds, then this is a big case, and the FCC would almost certainly appeal to the USSC. 2. Some have suggested what amounts to bifurcation of jurisdiction: (1) the FCC should regulate movement of information by regulating network providers; meanwhile, (2) the FTC can better protect consumers by regulating the applications that ride on the networks. As is, both the FCC and FTC are involved in both, although the FCC remains the most active concerning network providers. 3. On the second issue -- does the Comcast case flow from existing law such that Comcast had notice of binding law, Section 230 + the Policy Statement is the best bet. Pasted below is the full relevant language of 230(b). I think the FCC is going to lose on this one. Brad SEC. 230. PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE BLOCKING AND SCREENING OF OFFENSIVE MATERIAL. . . . (b) POLICY- It is the policy of the United States-- (1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and other interactive computer services and other interactive media; (2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation; (3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize user control over what information is received by individuals, families, and schools who use the Internet and other interactive computer services; (4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of blocking and filtering technologies that empower parents to restrict their children's access to objectionable or inappropriate online material; and (5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by means of computer.

Blogger: Login to read : Net Neutrality and Statutory Authority

Sun, 21 Feb 2010 22:35:30 +0000

Interesting take. This perspective is buoyed by the fact that the FCC had previously made clear that it did not like blocking in the Madison River case a few years ago.

Feld Thoughts : Things Women Entrepreneurs Can Learn From Indian Entrepreneurs

Sun, 21 Feb 2010 18:48:20 +0000

Related to this topic, NCWIT, ATLAS and Silicon Flatirons are co-sponsoring an Entrepreneurs Unplugged on Monday night (2/22) with Krista Marks. Event kicks off at 6:15 p.m. at ATLAS in Boulder, Colorado. Krista was co-founder of Kerpoof which had a favorable exit to Disney. Lucy Sanders and ATLAS' Jill Van Matre will co-moderate. The primary grist of discussion will be on Krista's career and how she helped build Kerpoof into a success. But a subthread will address issues related to providing a better pipeline for women into the high tech entrepreneurial community. Registration is free -- available at: http://www.silicon-flatirons.org/events.php?id=77... Brad

Blogger: Login to read : Electronic Legal Tools

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 04:30:14 +0000

The entrance of Bloomberg would be a natural for improved tools targeted at transactional attorneys. At least in this article, however, it appears that this is not yet a core market that they're focused upon.

Blogger: Login to read : Observations on Interoperability

Mon, 8 Feb 2010 04:27:55 +0000

Good find on the Virginia "common language" model. Before rolling state and local agencies under the bus, note that the federal government -- military excepted -- has shown almost no leadership by example in this space. Most notably, the IWN network was set up to much fanfare a few years ago to get DOJ, Treasury, and other federal users on the same system. At least as of a year ago, the project appeared DOA as the federal agencies could not get it together.