Legal Hire No. 2 at OpenArt AIAGC? Counsel? Senior Counsel? Head of Legal Ops? - we'll pick a title together after we figure it out together. Remote in the US, perhaps with extra credit for San Francisco or Chicago or LA or NYC affinity.
One lawyer exists at OpenArt. John Belcaster. We're looking for a second one.
Job Description?See pages 1-339 of David Epstein's Range. The book posits that generalists triumph in a specialized world.
Here's a sample of the generalism that's crossed the [g]eneral [c]ounsel's desk [lower-case 'g' and 'c' purposely placed]: licensing agreements across countries and continents; patent preparations; immigration issues; corporate governance matters; invitations to speak at law schools and conferences; collaboration deals with film directors, musical artists, and creative studios; agency actions from the U.S. trademark office; creation of AI-powered legal workflows; state and global taxation swirls; enterprise sales contracts; data privacy and information security screenings; financings; and on and on.
You can join in some, all, or none of that (because loads of other things rise and fall!)
But if all of that simply creates a paradox of choice, you could focus on something concrete, such as......Contracts: customer, vendor, partner, creator. You could, for example, own that end-to-end - intake, draft, negotiate, close, file. Tune the templates, playbooks, and systems so that the fourth time something happens, nobody needs us.
Or you could choose to focus on whatever you're good at, or whatever you're interested in, or whatever you want to know about, or, perhaps like John, something you know nothing about! Privacy? IP? Product counseling? Employment? Legal operations? The job exists to fit how you exist.
How we workTiny team, direct access, no layers. Unlike Aaron Burr, you'd sit in the rooms where it happens. We run legal on AI tools - drafting, review, research, triage. If you think AI will make lawyers faster but not obsolete, you'll be at home here. But if you think AI will make lawyers faster
and obsolete, you'll also be at home here.
Who's a good candidate?- Someone who recognizes that this - the world's only morally defensible inequality - tells a powerful story: CQ + PQ > IQ. Our 'curiosity quotient' plus our 'passion quotient' outweighs our 'intelligence quotient'. Or, to put it differently, it's the curious and the passionate among us, not the blindly intelligent, who move our worlds to better places.
- Someone with 25 years, or 25 months, or 25 weeks of experience. Someone who's three decades out of law school or three hours out of law school.
- Someone who doesn't know what's next, isn't discomforted by not knowing what's next, and, in many ways, prefers not knowing what comes next!
What we won't ask forA cover letter. A resume formatted for an applicant-tracking system. A ranking of your "preferred qualifications" against ours.
Instead, here's how to applySend John an email: [redacted]. CC [redacted]. In the email, using no more than one sentence, tell him what you
dislike most about artificial intelligence. Then, in no more than three sentences, tell him
why you dislike what you dislike. Also in the email, again using no more than three sentences, tell him why you're sending him the email. Finally, if you have a Linked bio, or a personal website, or a presence on a work website, send him a link to that. And if you don't have any such link, that's not a disqualifier (it can even be an amplifier!)
PayThe law in some states (California and Illinois, for example) requires us to list a salary range. We'll be more precise than that. John's base pay is $250,000. Let's use that as the median.
