Is there a big difference between intellectual property lawyers and IPO lawyers? What is the difference?

An intellectual property lawyer who has been in the business for three years can be said to be very young. Although it is not clear whether you are talking about patent-related intellectual property lawyers or trademark-related lawyers, in either case, it takes two or three years to write a patent or two or three years to become a lawyer. Three years of working time is not too much, or even too little.

-

The duty of an intellectual property lawyer is to be responsible for infringement litigation and patent invalidation when there is infringement (patent infringement, trademark infringement, etc.). For example, if A wants to invalidate one of B's patents, he should seek a patent lawyer. Similarly, if a product of C is sued by A for infringement, it will also find a patent lawyer).

-

IPO lawyers are responsible for financial, stock and other mergers and acquisitions, judging the legality of the other party's business activities, guiding the legality of merger and acquisition procedures, giving opinions, etc., and have little to do with intellectual property rights.

-

It is unrealistic to transfer posts to each other in theory. After all, the fields involved are different, but the same thing is that they all have a lawyer's practice license, which is not absolute (how to say it, it is domestic, but it depends on whether the customer approves it)