Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Tom: See my post on your other thread for some basics
There are good schools for entertainment law on the east coast (New York, specifically): NYU, Columbia, Fordham, Cardozo. If the school doesn't have a lot of courses specific to entertainment/media law, make sure they have strong transactional/contract course options - that's what's important
Also lots of firms and other in-house opportunities on the east coast. Between positions at firms, you've also got networks like MTV, labels (Sony, among others), and plenty of other places where you're likely to find in-house lawyers (ASCAP, for example)
I'm just curious to see what concentrations of law everyone is thinking about studying:
I'm interested in studying Intellectual Property Law with a track in Entertainment Law...
she says it looks bad if you round or inflate your GPA (eg, writing 3.7 when your UGPA is 3.68, etc). i dont see why that necessarily rules out using the LSAC gpa..but whatevs.
A fair warning that I really dislike the proliferation of addenda (IMO, they are whiny, and 95% of them make the author sound entitled and obnoxious), so take this advice with a grain of salt.
I think addenda should only be used for circumstances outside of your control. For example - if you came down with mono in the middle of the semester, if you suddenly had to become a caretaker for a grandparent or child, if you lost your scholarship and had to work fulltime to support yourself, if someone close to you died on the morning of the LSAT, etc.
Adjusting to college isn't really addendum worthy. I mean, what are you going to say that will really enhance your application? Many freshmen have a hard time adjusting; the circumstance isn't novel, nor is it something that was really earthshattering enough to seriously justify lower grades. It is what it is. There's nothing to explain.
i was very much of the same opinion as you, but then i read Anna ivey's book and she says difficult-adjustment-college-omg (lol, scratch the 'omg') addenda are okay. in fact, i think she says they're good. granted anna ivey isn't the end all be all of the admissions process, but i figure her word's pretty good? idk i (and she) could be dead wrong though.
the strange thing with me is that when i hear ppl say they had mono or something, i always feel a bit suspicious. i guess its the cynic in me. but i feel like Adcomms *must* feel a bit suspicious about all the mono-addenda they read.. no? idk, what are your opinions?
For mono and other serious illnesses, people often submit additional documentation (ie. letters from deans or doctors) as corroboration. Mono is seriously debilitating (Mario Ancic, a former top 10 tennis player did not play for over a YEAR because of mono). I generally give people the benefit of the doubt on sickness. In fact, I personally would be more suspicious of an "hard time adjusting to college" addendum and see it as "I drank and partied for a year before I got my stuff together" in nicer words.
As for Ivey, it's a great resource, but there's a lot of stuff in there that is outdated (for example - her suggestion to send a hard copy of every application in addition to an electronic copy. that's just not necessary anymore). I believe partially due to Ivey and the rise in professional consulting, as well as increased reliance on prelaw advisors, addenda are on the rise. People are writing addenda about everything under the sun and it's not necessary.