About the Cyberlaw Clinic

Harvard Law School‘s Cyberlaw Clinic, based at Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, provides high-quality, pro-bono legal services to appropriate clients on issues relating to the Internet, technology, and intellectual property. Students enhance their preparation for high-tech practice and earn course credit by working on real-world litigation, client counseling, advocacy, and transactional / licensing projects and cases. The Clinic strives to help clients achieve success in their activities online, mindful of (and in response to) existing law. The Clinic also works with clients to shape the law’s development through policy and advocacy efforts. The Cyberlaw Clinic was the first of its kind, and it continues its tradition of innovation in its areas of practice. The Clinic works independently, with law students supervised by experienced and licensed attorneys.  In some cases, the Clinic collaborates with counsel throughout the country to take advantage of regional or substantive legal expertise. The Cyberlaw Clinic advocates with or on behalf of collaborators and clients on a variety of law and policy topics. The Clinic generally does not take positions in its own name. It makes client selection and other decisions relevant to its practice mindful of a set of core values and actively seeks to advance those values through its work. Values at the heart of the Clinic’s practice and teaching activities include: promotion of a robust and inclusive online ecosystem for free expression; advancement of diversity as a key interest in technology development and tech policy; elimination or mitigation of the impact of bias in the development and deployment of technology; respect for and protection of privacy, vis-à-vis both private and government actors; open government; transparency with respect to public and private technical systems that impact all citizens (and, in particular, members of vulnerable populations); access to knowledge and information; advancement of cultural production through efficient and balanced regulatory and enforcement regimes; and support for broad participation in public discourse

From the Blog

Clinic Works w/R Street Institute on PTO Comment re: AI Inventions

The Cyberlaw Clinic recently submitted a comment in response to a request from the United States Patent and Trademark Office about the patentability of artificial intelligence (“AI”) inventions. The comment was submitted on behalf of the R Street Institute, a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public policy research organization. The USPTO sought guidance on handling patent applications for inventions created by generative AI technology. Addressing some of the many questions posed by the USPTO, the comment discusses whether entities other than natural persons should be able to own a patent, the impact that AI technology has on the level of a person of ordinary skill in the art, and whether patent laws need to be revised to account for AI inventions.

We’re Hiring: Calling Public Interest Attorneys Interested in Tech!

The Harvard Law School Cyberlaw Clinic at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society is seeking a Clinical Instructor to join our team.

We’re particularly excited, given the ever-expanding reach of technology, to diversify the skillset and expertise of our team with this hire. We are especially interested in attorneys with social justice practices — including practices that touch on race, gender, and economic issues — who have an interest in technology, even if they wouldn’t identify as tech lawyers.


Jenzabar, Inc. v. Long Bow Group, Inc.

JENZABAR, INC. v. LONG BOW GROUP, INC.  |  No. 2011-P-1533  |  Mass. App. Ct. January 18, 2012  |  The Cyberlaw Clinic prepared this amicus brief (pdf) on behalf of the Digital Media Law Project, supporting documentary film production company Long Bow Group, Inc.  The case concerns Long Bow’s use of Jenzabar’s name in metadata on web sites containing speech critical of Jenzabar and its founder.  The brief argues that Jenzabar’s attempt to use trademark law to prohibit the use of its name in metadata was an effort to render Long Bow’s protected speech inaccessible on the Internet and was therefore barred by the First Amendment and Article 16 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights.