Back to Prep Legal 101 Workshop - Design Notes

Legal 101 Workshop - Design Notes

For discussion with Josh before finalizing with Sam

The Core Challenge

Sam’s ideal: “Answer questions not in the FAQ” (requires pre-reading) Reality: Many attendees won’t do the pre-reading

How do we make Sam’s time valuable AND ensure the session works even if people show up cold?

Time Segment Notes
12:00-12:05 Intros, framing Set expectations
12:05-12:25 Sam’s 2 Case Studies One that went wrong, one that went well - crucial decision points
12:25-12:50 Q&A Prioritize questions NOT in FAQ
12:50-1:00 Resources How to access Stanford Startup Law: Sustainability, next steps

Why this works:

  • Case studies are valuable even if no one did pre-reading
  • Real examples make abstract legal concepts concrete
  • Q&A rewards those who did the pre-work with sharper answers
  • Everyone leaves knowing how to get more help

Making Pre-Reading Actually Happen

Nudges to try:

  • Short & specific: “Read these 10 questions (15 min)” not “browse the 125-question FAQ”
  • Stakes: “Sam will answer YOUR questions - but only if they’re not already in the FAQ”
  • Prime the pump: Ask 2-3 seed grantees to submit questions in advance, share as examples
  • Calendar reminder: Send link 1 week before AND day-of morning

Pre-work email (send 1 week before):

Sam McClure from Stanford Law has created a 125-question Legal FAQ for Stanford founders. We’ve curated 10 questions most relevant to seed grantees - please read these before the session (~15 min).

[Link to FAQ] [Link to curated 10 questions]

Sam will spend our session time on YOUR questions that go beyond the FAQ. Come prepared with questions specific to your project!

Case Study Request for Sam

Ask Sam to prepare 2 brief examples (~5-7 min each):

Example 1: Something that went wrong

  • What was the project/team?
  • What decision did they make (or not make)?
  • What was the consequence?
  • What should they have done differently?

Example 2: Something that went well

  • What was the project/team?
  • What key legal decision did they get right?
  • Why did it matter?
  • What can others learn from it?

Ideal if examples are:

  • Education/research-related (relatable to our audience)
  • Early-stage decisions (not late-stage complexity)
  • Stanford-affiliated if possible

Questions for Josh

  1. Does case-study-anchored format feel right?
  2. Should we ask seed grant coordinators to encourage 2-3 grantees to submit Qs in advance?
  3. How do we promote this - email from Josh? From coordinators?
  4. Should we record it for those who can’t attend?

Central Questions (for reference)

  1. What legal structures (LLC, nonprofit, B-corp, etc.) are best suited for different types of academic innovations, and when should you incorporate?
  2. How do Stanford’s IP policies affect seed grantees, and what should founders know about protecting and licensing intellectual property?
  3. What legal agreements should early-stage teams have in place (founder agreements, contractor agreements, user terms)?
  4. What free or low-cost legal resources are available to Stanford-affiliated founders?

Learning Objectives (for reference)

  1. Understand the key legal considerations for early-stage academic innovations (entity types, IP protection, liability, contracts)
  2. Identify when and how to access pro bono legal resources available through Stanford (including Stanford Startup Law: Sustainability)
  3. Recognize common legal pitfalls that academics face when commercializing or scaling research-based projects
  4. Apply a basic legal framework to assess their own project’s legal needs and next steps

Draft: Jan 27, 2026

Source: prep/2026-02-18-legal-101-workshop-design.md