This interview has been published by Namrata Singh and The SuperLawyer Team
Hello and welcome to SuperLawyer Youtube channel. And once again, we are here with a phenomenal personality Vibhav Mithal and a very dear friend. I have known him for more than a couple of years now. Welcome Vibhav. Thank you for agreeing to this interview. And yes, I should introduce him as a partner at Anand and Anand and other than that, he will carry forward with his own story.
I would request you to tell us about your journey into the legal field, and how you decided to become a lawyer, especially in intellectual property rights, which you are fascinated about and have made a name in. What inspired you to specialize in such a niche area? And please take us through your journey. Welcome Vibhav and thank you.
Thank you so much, Divya. It’s an absolute pleasure to do this with you. I’ll start from the beginning of my journey. My parents are doctors, and there’s a conventional expectation in India that a doctor’s son will become a doctor or an engineer’s son will become an engineer, right?
My father told me clearly, “Son, you won’t be able to do engineering,” so it was between medicine or another profession. I honed in on law because, at that point, it was more a process of elimination. I didn’t want to do engineering, and although I considered medicine, I wasn’t sure. Both my parents cast long shadows, being very successful in their fields. I felt that pursuing law would give me the flexibility to move into journalism, which interested me at the time. I was heavily involved in theater during school, and I thought I might explore laws around theater and playwrights, or perhaps even pursue an MBA after law school. Thus, I chose law, keeping my options open.
Once I made up my mind, I started coaching during class 12. Even though I was busy with my board exams, I began career launcher coaching from SDA market in New Delhi. I remember this very clearly; it was back in 2007-2008 when I took the CLAT exam while also preparing for my 12th boards. Despite taking up the coaching, I couldn’t focus entirely on it because I prioritized my 12th exams. However, I was very mindful and present during the coaching classes, which were held every Monday from 5:30 to 7:30 PM.
By the time I reached the CLAT exam, I had a good understanding of how to approach competitive exams. I also did a crash course with Career Launcher in April before the exam. Fortunately, I made it to NUJS, Calcutta. I had a clear strategy for the CLAT exam, knowing how many marks each section was worth, how much time to allocate to each section, and the order in which I would tackle them. I prepared thoroughly for the black-and-white sections like GK and English vocabulary, while practicing the more nuanced sections through mocks.
NUJS was fantastic for five years, but I won’t go into too much detail. Moving on to the question about intellectual property, one of my uncles, Ratan Masaji, introduced me to the concept when I was in my second year of law school. We were at the Indian Habitat Center, having tea on the terrace, and he mentioned an IP case. The idea of intellectual property intrigued me
By the end of my third year at NUJS in May 2011, two significant events occurred. First, I interned with Geeta Luthra, a renowned civil litigator, which ignited my passion for litigation. It was an intense internship, with long hours from 10 AM to 1 or 2 AM, spanning four weeks. During this period, I experienced the trial courts in Delhi, which remained active until June.
The second notable event was meeting Rodney Ryder, a prominent figure in intellectual property law, in CP. He shared his experiences and recommended I read “Rembrandts in the Attic,” a book on intellectual property rights and monetization, particularly focusing on patents. This book, written in the early 2000s, discussed the evolving perception of intellectual property in America.
After reading the book in the summer, my fourth-year courses in intellectual property began. My professors, Anirban Majumdar (copyright law), Vishwas Devaiya (trademark law), and Shamnat Basheer (patent law), further solidified my interest. Anirban sir’s teaching resonated with me, especially due to my background in theater. Shamnat sir shifted my focus from copyright to patents, and Vishwas Devaiya sir introduced me to trademark law.
By the end of my fourth year, I was certain about pursuing intellectual property law. Despite being in the top 20 of my batch, I chose not to participate in placements. My commitment was clear to my peers, who often went on weekend trips while I focused on internships and coursework to enhance my CV.
In my final year, I faced pressure from my mother to consider placements, but I remained steadfast in my decision to specialize in intellectual property. I dedicated my time to relevant internships and coursework to ensure my CV reflected my focus on IP. This was a stressful period as IP litigation jobs were scarce.
Fortunately, in March 2013, Anand and Anand held a recruitment fair at my college. I was interviewed and selected the same day, about 40 days before my final exams. The interview, which has become part of ANA folklore, involved questions on patent law and the concept of a person of ordinary skill in the art. My current boss and Mr. Anand himself conducted the interviews.
This journey, from my third year to securing a position at Anand and Anand, highlights my commitment to intellectual property law and the steps I took to achieve my goal.
Your story is truly fascinating, especially how you were so determined to focus solely on intellectual property litigation. This field is still quite niche and hasn’t become mainstream yet. Thank you for your dedication, as it ensures we have skilled lawyers in India who specialize in intellectual property litigation.
With that in mind, you must have witnessed significant changes over the past decade in this field. What kind of advancements or enhancements have you observed, and how have you contributed to these changes? Please share your story.
I think one of the main aspects of changes in intellectual property law over the last decade is my tenure at Anand since I left law school. One important thing for the audience to understand is that Anand and Anand is a pro-IP firm.
We protect and enforce intellectual property rights, standing up for the IP owner across various fields, including trademark law, patent law, and copyright. For instance, in patent law, we represent the patentee, such as a cancer drug owner. In trademark law, we stand with brand owners, and in copyright law, we support individual artists or singers against any opposing party. The changes we’ve seen in IP law are viewed through this protective lens. Much of the intellectual property rights litigation occurs at the Delhi High Court.
Let me highlight two to three major changes in IP law from different perspectives. First, regarding the reliefs granted by the court: On my first day on the job, my immediate boss handed me the 275-page judgment passed by Justice Manmohan Singh in the Roche Cipla patent infringement dispute. This was the first lawsuit filed under the Patents Act of 1970 after the product patent regime had begun. My first two and a half years involved being part of the Roche versus Cipla appeal. Roche, a cancer drug maker, had initially lost before the single judge, and the first appeal was before the division bench. During this process, I learned a great deal about patent law, conducted extensive research, and honed the art of handling complex matters.
A significant change occurred on November 27, 2015, when we won that appeal. The court laid down several concepts of patent law and jurisprudence, particularly in the context of pharmaceutical patents, which remain relevant today. This victory marked a shift towards a pro-patentee stance about two and a half years into my profession.
In terms of substance, trademark law reliefs have blossomed, now including costs and damages against infringers. Copyright law jurisprudence has also been evolving and growing. The reason I emphasize this from a patent perspective is that it illustrates how jurisprudence evolves, especially in the more nuanced areas of law.
Another significant experience was my involvement in the Monsanto dispute at the Supreme Court level after returning from my LLM. This dispute provided a different type of experience, where I was not only the most junior member but also deeply familiar with the case files.
So, the issue was more in the context of patent eligibility tests. Simply put, it was about determining whether an invention qualifies as a plant variety, a gene, or something else. The court was able to understand the various legal issues, set aside the decision of the division bench, and sent it back to a single judge for reconsideration and trial.
I highlight these points from a patent perspective to show how courts adeptly understand the nuances of legal issues. Outcomes can vary, but this change shows progress.
The second change relates to procedural aspects. In India, associates involved in litigation ensure that once a lawsuit is filed and summons are served, service is coordinated through their office. I remember in 2015, about two years into my career, I had to serve a defendant in a foreign country. I got their address from public domains and gave it to our courier service, but they reported the address as incorrect. This led to a lengthy argument, as an incorrect address meant the defendant wouldn’t be served, prolonging the litigation unnecessarily.
One notable change is the introduction of WhatsApp service by the Delhi High Court in 2018, which streamlines this process. Additionally, procedural laws have evolved, imposing strict timelines. If a written statement isn’t filed within 120 days, the right is forfeited. Previously, after filing a written statement, separate processes like admission denial affidavits would extend the timeline significantly. Now, these processes are clubbed together, expediting litigation.
For example, in 2022, post-COVID, I handled a trademark case where the defendant had no viable defense. We moved for summary judgment, argued, and received a favorable ruling, saving the client’s costs for a full-fledged trial. These changes, largely due to the Commercial Courts Act, recognize IP as a commercial dispute, altering litigation timelines and procedures. The Delhi High Court’s rules also include WhatsApp service, reflecting significant procedural advancements.
Lastly, with the abolition of IPAB, the Delhi High Court’s Intellectual Property Rights Division now handles both IP infringement cases and appeals from the registry. This has expedited the resolution process; for instance, two trademark appeals were decided within 36 days.
For students and new practitioners, these rapid changes require a clear understanding of timelines and meticulous planning. While litigation often focuses on immediate deadlines, having both a macro and micro view is crucial. Balancing short-term responses with long-term planning helps navigate the evolving legal landscape efficiently.
Your explanation is meticulous. Your ability to recall dates, days, years, and everything in such detail is impressive. It’s not easy to maintain that level of precision, and it’s commendable.
As you mentioned your LLM, could you elaborate on that a bit more? Specifically, what differences did you notice between the study process in India and in the US? A comparative analysis would be very insightful. Additionally, how did your thought process change after completing your LLM and returning to rejoin your work? Would you be willing to share those experiences?
Of course, it’s an excellent question. Before I address the differences and changes, I think it’s essential to first discuss when to pursue an LLM. The decision is highly personal.
An LLM’s value depends significantly on what you make of it. One of the most crucial aspects of an LLM is how you utilize the program, the choice of the program, the professors, and the course combinations. How you spend your time in the program defines your LLM experience and impacts your time after completing it.
Whether to pursue an LLM immediately after college or after gaining work experience is a personal choice. I chose to do it after working for a few years for several reasons. Firstly, you gain better clarity about your goals with an LLM after having two to three years of work experience. While two to three years of work experience is ideal, a minimum of two years is necessary. This experience teaches you discipline, how to handle stressful situations and deadlines, and it clarifies your mind after some time in practice.
For instance, if you’re practicing in a specific area, you might decide to pursue an LLM in that same field. In my case, I was practicing intellectual property law and chose to do an LLM in the same area because my practice confirmed my interest in intellectual property. However, it could have gone the other way. After two or three years in intellectual property practice, I could have concluded that I wasn’t enjoying it and decided to pursue an LLM in a different field.
There are advantages to gaining work experience before pursuing an LLM. The overall LLM experience is different because, with work experience, you don’t get overwhelmed by tough professors, challenging assignments, or grading concerns. You’re able to handle situations on their merits and substance, focusing on what you want to learn without being overly concerned about grades. This clarity often comes with work experience.
Additionally, work experience helps you decide which LLM college to attend. I had a few options, but I chose to attend Boston University School of Law for their niche LLM in Intellectual Property program, even though it didn’t qualify me for the US bar exam.
Of course. It’s an excellent question. Before I address the differences and changes, I want to first discuss when to pursue an LLM. This decision is a personal choice.
I made a conscious decision in my journey. I remember having an informal interaction with a leading law firm in the US. They mentioned that they had encountered many Indian lawyers who come to America, but I was the first one they met who didn’t intend to take the bar exam or even choose a course that required it. I explained that given my job experience and exposure in India, achieving an equivalent position in America would take three to five years, perhaps even less, but it would still require significant time. Therefore, the bar exam was not a priority for me. Instead, I focused on learning intellectual property.
During my studies, I took diverse courses, including Trade Secrets Law, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Law, and an IP Workshop at Boston University School of Law. In the IP Workshop, we critiqued leading academics’ papers, including one on the Oracle-Google Java API copyright dispute, which the US Supreme Court later decided in favor of Google. I wrote a paper supporting the copyright owner, diving deep into the history of the dispute.
This academic course, seemingly detached from practical practice, taught me to understand and formulate arguments based on the underlying positions of opposing papers. This skill has been invaluable, even aiding me in the Monsanto decision when I returned to India.
In terms of differences and takeaways, one significant aspect of American legal education is the required study time. For every hour of class, an average reader needs at least three hours of study outside class. For instance, 10 hours of class time a week, or 10 credits, translates to 40 hours of study. This means dedicating eight hours every day, Monday to Friday, solely to studying.
Each lecture comes with assigned readings, and professors ask questions based on these readings. If you’re unprepared, you’ll fall behind and have to catch up on your own. Staying on top of readings is crucial for continuous learning. Professors will push you if you’re diligent. For example, in my Food and Drug Law course, my professor encouraged me to compare the biologic and biosimilar regimes in India, rather than taking an end-semester exam. She is an authority in the food and drug space, and her guidance was invaluable.
This commitment to preparation and engagement defines the American law school experience and is a key difference from other systems.
I ended up writing a 70-page paper for that course, not because I had planned to, but because the professor engaged with me continuously, rather than assessing me on an end-semester exam. She kept giving me deadlines, saying things like, “I like the discussion. Why don’t you come back with a title next week?” So I went back with a title. Then she said, “I like the title. Why don’t you come back with an abstract next week?” I wrote the abstract. Then she said, “Now that you have the abstract, let’s work on the informative portion of the paper, and then we’ll come to the analysis.” This created a different kind of engagement.
On the academic side, the LLM experience involves investing in your education and studies. However, an equally important aspect is the exposure outside the classroom, where you meet people from different countries. During orientation, I made sure to meet every single batchmate. This is common across any law school, but I made a concerted effort to connect with everyone. As a result, my friend circle grew to 16 people from 11 different countries. Despite the craziness of studies, we managed to do three trips together. We went to Mexico during spring break with half of the group, and after exams, all 16 of us took a trip to Cape Cod in Massachusetts. We rented a large house that could accommodate all of us, which took half an hour just to explore fully.
One memorable moment was when we arrived at the house in May, around this time of year. The American winter had just ended, and summer hadn’t fully started yet. We got there around noon, but by 7 PM, we realized no one had entered the kitchen, and we were all hungry. We discovered the stove didn’t work, so we called the person who arranged the rental. He panicked, saying he would send someone to fix it, but that person didn’t speak English. We assured him it wasn’t a problem, given our diverse group from 11 different countries; we would manage.
This experience highlighted the value of an LLM beyond academics. It teaches you many skills and builds lasting friendships and big ideas. It’s been seven years since I finished my LLM, and I’m still in touch with my alma mater, BU Law. I even spoke there recently. We had a reunion in 2019, reinforcing the strong connections formed during that time. My LLM books are still on my shelf, and I refer to them when needed. Some recent matters I’ve worked on directly relate to my LLM studies, particularly in IP law.
An LLM experience isn’t just about ticking off a checklist; it’s about growth and development, both consciously and subconsciously. It’s important to be clear about why you’re pursuing an LLM and how you intend to use it. The combination of professors and courses you choose is crucial, but so is enjoying the journey. My schedule was set: I studied from Sunday to Friday evening, then spent Friday evening and Saturday with friends. Saturday morning was for house chores and a bit of study, and Sunday was dedicated to studying. Every weekend, from September until graduation, we had fun on Friday and Saturday nights. Looking back, I feel like I balanced my studies and social life well, and I certainly made the most of my time with friends.
Wow, what a fascinating journey you have had! I don’t know whether you planned it all or if it just happened flawlessly for you, but you always seem to achieve the best possible outcomes in whatever you do. From my experience with you on AI and law, as well as AI and IP, I can certainly attest to that.
As you enjoyed your LLM and your work with Anand and Anand, where you decided to prioritize IP, it has clearly become your niche. You are now an authority in the field. I want to ask, how did you come to love AI and law, as well as AI and IP, in the same manner? What prompted this interest, especially since you started working on it long before it became a popular topic? Additionally, could you please share your perspectives on the current impact of AI on IP and what you foresee in the future, given your extensive experience?
Thank you for that question. My interest in AI is something that often surprises people, both at my workplace and elsewhere, especially considering my passion for IP. They often wonder how I got into this field. I think it boils down to a couple of key factors.
First and foremost is curiosity. I’ve always been curious, and AI intrigued me way back in 2019, just two years after completing my LLM. Second, my brother-in-law, who is heavily involved in AI, played a significant role. Similar to how I had a masaji who spoke about IP, I had a jijaji who mentioned AI in conversations. Additionally, in 2019, Mr. Anand organized a moot court focusing on AI issues, which led to further discussions and piqued my interest in AI.
The real turning point came during the COVID lockdown. With the extra time on my hands, I stopped watching TV by mid-April 2020, just a month after the lockdown began. Instead, I started reading more. I came across articles by Karen Hao, who wrote for MIT Technology Review and published a weekly newsletter called “Algorithm.” Her writings sparked my interest further. I even wrote to her, and she knows about my admiration for her work.
Around the same time, I joined the MKAI (Milton Keynes Artificial Intelligence) community. They held weekly events on AI, which I found fascinating. They also had a WhatsApp group for discussions. By November 2020, I was actively participating in these discussions, dedicating an hour or so each evening to reading, responding, and sharing my views instead of watching TV.
This routine continued for about six months until Richard Foster Fletcher asked me to become the voluntary head of the MKAI community in early 2021. I held this role until the end of 2022. During my one and a half years with MKAI, we conducted numerous LinkedIn Live sessions, where I often served as the lead panelist. This period significantly enriched my understanding and involvement in AI.
So, my journey into AI began with curiosity and was fueled by influential people and timely opportunities during the COVID lockdown.
My journey into AI ethics began with what could be termed as a long-distance LLM, or an interactive LLM, if you will. Monthly events and my role as a lead panelist in LinkedIn Live sessions required extensive reading, sparking my interest in AI ethics. One particularly impactful read was a book on AI ethics authored by Mark from MIT, alongside literature on machine learning and “Transforming in the Age of AI,” which I began exploring in 2020, just before COVID-19. These discoveries were driven purely by curiosity.
Soon after, I became involved with a Springer journal titled “AI Ethics,” joining its peer review board upon nomination. This marked my formal introduction to the field. Subsequently, my tenure as voluntary head of community at MKAI, an organization dedicated to general AI, spanned one and a half years. MKAI proved invaluable for anyone looking to delve into AI and establish themselves in the field.
My involvement with MKAI coincided with my joining ForHumanity, a role closer to home as they were then developing an AI systems audit framework under data protection laws. This move solidified my commitment, and I haven’t looked back since. With ForHumanity, initiatives like Koli Team India were launched, focusing on India’s AI policies from 2021 onwards. We meticulously reviewed the national strategy, responsible AI reports, and contributed to shaping the AI audit scheme proposed in the withdrawn data protection bill. Throughout 2022, I actively participated in responding to industry calls for comments, forging connections that furthered organic growth.
LinkedIn played a significant role during this period, facilitating high-quality interactions and connections across the globe, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic from 2020 until early 2022. Although initially centered on IP and AI debates, my focus evolved towards understanding AI comprehensively—exploring AI ethics, responsible AI, and its ethical implications. This broadened perspective led to collaborations with industry bodies and engagements with legal aspects, particularly concerning generative AI and IP issues.
My involvement extended to providing initial feedback to NASSCOM on their generative AI guidelines, an effort recognized in their published report of June last year. These experiences have shaped my understanding of AI from a legal lens, highlighting its impact on intellectual property and sparking debates on ownership and authorship.
Looking back, my journey has been defined by a deliberate curiosity and a strategic choice in how I allocate my time. Engaging with AI holistically, I’ve maintained a non-technical approach, leveraging my legal background to translate ethical considerations into responsible AI practices—focusing on data protection, IPR, and security implications. As the landscape continues to evolve, my commitment remains steadfast, anchored in a clear understanding of AI’s legal implications and its transformative potential.
Wow, “Chip War” is one of my favorite books. Yes, Lord Tim Clement. I’ve read a lot about him and have interacted with him a couple of times. I enjoy how with every sentence he speaks, there’s always a book reference. That’s something that makes me really happy. It’s rare to find someone who always has a book to refer to, and I love that. I’m an avid reader myself. I have all the books in the series, like “Chip War,” “Breached,” and others that explore AI and law from a non-technical perspective. It’s important not to always view it from a technical standpoint.
Knowing you as someone who demystifies AI from a non-technical angle, I’d like to ask: What key points do you think everyone should understand about AI, not just from a technical standpoint but also from a legal perspective? Additionally, for students and young lawyers in fields like litigation or IP law, how do you suggest they approach building a career similar to yours? What should they focus on as law students or early-career lawyers?
I appreciate these insightful questions. I’m glad to see the flow of our conversation touching on various aspects. Let me share my journey, focusing on two key areas you’ve highlighted: understanding AI and what students can do in this domain.
Firstly, it’s crucial to grasp the current AI landscape. AI can be categorized into two main types: artificial narrow intelligence (ANI) and artificial general intelligence (AGI). ANI, as a pattern recognition tool, generates outputs like images or text based on recognized patterns, albeit within its defined tasks. AGI, on the other hand, envisages AI reaching human-level intelligence, a frontier still distant despite ongoing research and occasional claims.
For students entering this field, understanding these distinctions is pivotal. Current laws and regulations, including those from bodies like the World Intellectual Property Organization and recent EU AI Act amendments, predominantly address ANI. This underscores the importance of comprehending AI’s present capabilities and limitations.
AI pervades everyday experiences—from entertainment streaming to social media interactions. Viewing AI through a non-technical legal lens helps appreciate its omnipresence and anticipate associated legal challenges such as privacy and security.
Regarding AI’s impact on employment, it’s essential not to confine discussions solely to job displacement. While some roles may shift, others will emerge, akin to historical technological shifts. Embracing AI comprehensively demands holistic perspective, encompassing its societal, economic, and ethical dimensions.
For aspiring students, clarity in career aspirations is crucial. Whether pursuing AI or intellectual property (IP) law, introspection into personal interests is foundational. Knowing oneself—what interests and excites—is pivotal in shaping a fulfilling career path. My own journey into IP law stemmed from personal curiosity and academic exploration rather than mere prestige.
Specializing in IP law necessitates a focused approach. Awareness of diverse opportunities beyond prominent firms is vital. During my own career search, I meticulously researched roles across various tiers of firms, aligning each with specific career goals and progression plans.
Internship experiences are pivotal in this journey. Commitment and diligence during internships often translate into tangible career opportunities. I recall instances where interns’ dedication during intense projects led to permanent roles—a testament to the importance of commitment and understanding one’s responsibilities.
Opportunities in AI and related fields abound for those passionate about technology and policy. Playing to one’s strengths, whether technical or legal, is essential. My advice to younger individuals exploring AI is to leverage their interests and strengths effectively within this dynamic field.
In conclusion, navigating the evolving landscape of AI demands not only technical acumen but also a clear understanding of its legal and societal implications. By aligning personal passions with professional pursuits and seizing internship opportunities with dedication, aspiring professionals can forge rewarding careers in AI and IP law.
“You’ve highlighted a crucial aspect: respect for the job and for the person assigning you tasks. Upholding this can significantly increase your chances of securing a job offer or a pre-placement opportunity, even during internships.
I believe this perspective you’ve raised is vital. It’s not just about putting in 16, 18, or even 20 hours of work. What stands out is the importance of being respectful and mindful of the consequences that follow. The significance of a task isn’t solely determined by whether it’s handled in the Supreme Court or High Court.
It should be seen in terms of its impact on your career. When you assist, recognition follows. That’s the essence of your suggestion, as I understand it. It’s crucial for students to grasp this concept, and it’s what we aim to convey here.
We’ve covered much ground in this interview, but there’s one important question I haven’t asked yet about your personal life. How do you manage to maintain balance amidst your rigorous reading and work schedule? What advice would you give to others who struggle to find time for their personal lives?
Could you share how you’ve managed this so far and offer insights on how others can emulate your approach?”
Work-life balance is a crucial topic, especially in the post-COVID era. Personally, my parents, family, friends, and my wife have played pivotal roles in maintaining this balance.
Initially, living with my parents in Delhi before marriage provided significant support. Litigation demands time to develop, and being able to consult and spend quality time with my parents was invaluable. Both of them are doctors, and observing their disciplined work schedules—from leaving early in the morning to returning by evening—left a lasting impression on me since childhood.
After marriage, my wife’s unwavering support has been transformative, particularly from 2017 onwards, coinciding with significant milestones in my career, including Supreme Court cases and ventures into AI. Her background as a former corporate lawyer, now a teacher, brings a deep understanding of professional challenges, which greatly contributes to maintaining balance.
Finding balance, for me, involves consciously investing time in activities that bring joy and relaxation. During the COVID period, this meant pursuing hobbies like reading about AI, alongside family time with shows like “The Crown.” As life resumed, balance shifted to outings for movies or enjoying quiet mornings together.
Balancing responsibilities extends to our household, where everyone, including my sister-in-law who is a teacher, contributes. Even our dog plays a role in keeping spirits up. Quality time spent together during leisure hours significantly impacts our overall balance.
Self-care is crucial. Taking time to connect with oneself amidst busy schedules is essential for maintaining equilibrium. Structuring my day with discipline has been key—I start work promptly in the morning and ensure to leave by early evening unless urgent matters demand otherwise. This routine allows for dedicated time at home, whether it’s enjoying moments with family or unwinding with entertainment.
Achieving work-life balance hinges on transparent communication about priorities and mutual understanding within the family circle. This approach has been instrumental in shaping my perspective on balancing professional and personal commitments effectively.
Thank you, Vibhav, for bringing such insightful perspectives to our conversation. Your thoughts on work-life balance were particularly inspiring, emphasizing the importance of discipline in achieving harmony. I’m certain our learners and listeners will find your approach worth emulating, and I encourage them to connect with you. Your responsiveness and generosity are truly commendable.
I also appreciate your role as a community builder, bridging the gap for us lawyers in AI and other emerging fields, making these advancements accessible in India and beyond. Lastly, thank you for agreeing to this interview. I hope you found it enjoyable, and once again, your participation is greatly appreciated.
It’s been my absolute pleasure.
I have just shared my perspectives and more than happy to listen to anyone. Any questions and you’re right I do respond to everyone almost who reaches out to me. So there’s absolutely no problem. Anyone is confused. If there’s anything they have questions, they want to ask more, happy to converse.
So thank you so much. It’s been an absolute pleasure interacting with you.
Get in touch with Vibhav Mittal-
