So your entire argument for saying that the situation is not dire for an Indian IPR LLM fresher is (a) TMT is a very broad bucket, and (b) if you make it to a T1 firm, your pay is often at par, with bonus being a function of billing.

Both of these, even if true, do not even question the premise that there is a dire scarcity of opportunities in the sector as a whole. It is an accepted fact that for every IPR/TMT team that pays more than 1L to a fresher, there are 50 M&A teams that do the same. And perhaps more importantly, when have you ever seen an Indian IPR LLM person being hired as a fresher at any T1/T2 law firm's TMT team!? In my 5 years, I have never. In fact, I've been told by the partners to typically reject those CVs even when we're shortlisting candidates, unless something extraordinary jumps out.

Secondly, no, the pay is not at par in most of the cases. The average M&A lawyer earns far more than an average IPR lawyer - it's a function of the assignments that create the billing. The typical bill size for an acquisition (with the most basic due diligence, SPA drafting & negotiation) is significantly more than the deal size of the best media and entertainment agreements or IP management endorsement assignments - which is why leading IP heavy firms like Anand or Khimani pay significantly lesser. Even in T1s, I can speak with confidence that KCO pays IP team much lesser, and JSA has a different firm for IP altogether with much lesser pay scales. Even in Trilegal, the team that does IP & Media work within TMT gives much lesser bonus than the Tri BLR team that does core TMT work.

Let's not misguide youngsters. The situation is what it is. You can choose to jump in on it anyway - but beware of the reality.

It is a niche field, yes; but the situation is not as dire as it has been made out to be.

TMT is a broad bucket (abbreviation for Telecom, Media, Tech). The term was created when there was growing sectoral regulation due to advancements in these industries, and existing laws were not sufficient to fully address the issues arising therefrom.

Over a period of time, and in particular, more recently, TMT has been used to cover any upcoming area of law - Fintech, Media and Entertainment, Gaming - essentially anything that may have an interplay with either the T, M, or T. As pointed out above, this primarily includes data privacy, telecom, media, and tech regulations.

Certain TMT teams have specialised focuses - for instance, Harsh Walia at Khaitan & Co specialises in Telecom. Jaideep Reddy from Trilegal and Smita Jha from Khaitan & Co focus on Fintech and Crypto. This does not, however, mean that they do not advise on other areas of law that form part of the broader TMT bucket.

IPR, being a separate field of its own, has separate specialised partners that work in the industry. It is very rare to now see an IP team also advise on general TMT laws. You could argue that the AZB IP teams do broader work than just core IP, and therefore, are TMT teams. However, they continue to be characterized as an IP practice (whose core focus would be trademarks, copyrights, and design prosecution work, along with transactional support to their corporate and M&A teams).

The opportunities are fewer given that the number of partners in the industry are limited. However, if you make it to a Tier 1 practice, the pay is often at par with other corporate teams. Your bonus will directly depend on the amount of work your partner brings, and a function of how well you bill (or appease to your partners). There is differential pay in certain "IP" teams but the pay still exceeds what is paid by pure boutiques.

I would still say that you should apply anywhere you can get an opportunity - by hook or crook. For each law firm TMT vacancy you apply for, there will be 20 candidates with relevant practical experience - and more often than not - from T1 law schools. To be brutally honest, an LLM in IPR from anywhere in India is seen more as a minus than a plus in T1/T2 law firm circles (since people will assume that you couldn't get a foreign LLM).

Just apply to any and every opportunity you find by tailoring your experience to whatever the vacancy is for. It will be slightly difficult to explain why you're doing an IPR LLM and still applying for a gen corp vacancy, but it'll be ten times harder to even land an interview for a TMT team at any decently paying law firm team with an Indian LLM.

If you're dead set on IPR, then yes, realistically, your best shot is boutique firms and litigation chambers that pay less than 40-50k per month, and hope to work your way upwards from there. It's not an easy journey, but I earnestly wish you the best of luck.

Thank you so much! Since I’m currently pursuing an IPR LL.M. from a Tier-1 law school, I’m trying to understand the practical reality of breaking into this such law space as a fresher. Would you recommend that I focus primarily on getting internships with TMT teams/offices and converting one into a PPO, or should I also be applying directly for full-time roles? Given how niche the market is, what route would you realistically consider the most viable for someone in my position? Thanks

With all due respect, please spend some time actually reading about these buzzwords. What does "combining" TMT with data privacy/AI/Tech law even mean!? 99% times, when anyone says they do TMT law, all of this forms the bread and butter of what you do - there is no "combining", this is core TMT.

With a few exceptions, same goes true for IP too: most TMT lawyers are fairly well versed with copyright law because you need that everytime you advise on content related media / ad laws, including basic aspects like software/content licensing, ownership over AI-generated content, ad advisories, endorsement deals etc. What TMT teams don't typically also do is things like trademark registrations or patent filings or disputes on these. That's typically handled by an IP team. Very specific partners do all of this, and that's typically what is referred to as a 'TMT/IP' team. And yes, everything in my previous comment continues to squarely apply to these teams too - it's too small and niche a market, there's not enough partners, and noone wants to hire a fresher outside of PPOs. You'll have 50x more chances at M&A, if you pivot. Maybe you still want to do this - and I can respect that and related to it, but you should know the facts before you take that decision. All the best.

What about offices that have a broader TMT practice combining TMT with IPR and emerging areas like AI, data/privacy, and technology law, essentially a TMT × IPR practice? Would you say the same concern about limited opportunities and lower-paying roles applies to those teams as well?

I'll be brutally honest with you: I can count the number of partners who actually do media law at a remotely decently paying firm on my fingertips. For each such team, there exist at least 50 M&A teams in the market that pay similarly. Those are not good odds. Your chances of finding a job in a decently paying firm in the TMT vertical as a fresher are therefore very slim.

My honest advice would be to pivot unless you're absolutely smitten by TMT as a practice area and do not mind going to much smaller and lower-paying IP/Media law positions.

Hi everyone! I am final year student at a non NLU (not a very renowned college, we have no placements through campus). I don't really have a very strong CV, my internships have been at small places in IPR, Corporate and In-House roles.

I do have an interest in TMT, particularly in Media Laws. However, most of my peers who are doing very well have been striving towards a career in General Corporate or Dispute Resolution. Is pursuing my interest in TMT particularly in Media even worth it? I am afraid since it's not really a vast field, the opportunities are way less, particularly for someone not from a good college. I don't want to invest my final year in something which has no scope for me in the future.

Please suggest if pursuing IPR in small firms would be a better option instead.