1. No. Theoretical IP is increadibly different from what you would practice at work. The actual work is increadibly boring, mundane and repetitive. I don't understand who are the people saying this is going anywhere but the number of partners and associates telling me to they can't leave even though they're trying tells me another story. I was told to venture out before I locked in, and I couldn't be more grateful. A profession in IP academia seems interesting but actual practice will have you begging to opt out.

2. Low attrition, but equally low demand. A lot of IP work can very frankly be taken up by someone who knows basic data entry and can replicate submissions, you do not need a law degree or for that matter even a deep understanding of IP. The pool of resources and cases is small, and India's IP practice is not nearly sophisticated enough for it to require you to use your brains

3. If your only concern is getting placed, it would not be hard. But you would be paid a lot lower, the work does not get more interesting, and the scope for you pay scale to increase doesn't increase much either. Think of this in the long term, not just for the short term. IP litigation might hold another story, but even in that a lot of recent cases seem to revolving around IP issues that have largely solid foundations and clear answers.
4. Start elsewhere, the work you do in IP will largely be the same everywhere. And unfortunately so is the pay, most tier 1 firms do not pay their IP teams at par with others. The only difference that you would face, is maybe the quality but even that would be marginally so. Start at a boutique firm, build your connects and then branch out.

5. No. Theoretical ipr is increadibly different from practical. Most students after a single ipr internship usually end up deciding that this is not the thing for them.