Media IP Counsel in 2026: Los Angeles Over-Indexes at 463

A media company's general counsel weighing entertainment IP lawyers Los Angeles-based against teams in New York should first see where the movable talent goes. Sartori & Partners data show that Los Angeles took 23.4% of the lateral moves made by lawyers with a media focus in the 12 months to October 2026, 40 moves, an index of 463, a figure that sets the city's share of media moves against its share of all lateral moves. New York took 28.1% of those moves, at an index of 190. The work sits in the same place: 16.2% of media and entertainment deals were handled with lawyers in Los Angeles, and IP lawyers worked on 26.3% of the sector's deals. Two cautions frame what follows. Deal counts include disputes taken from public court and trademark-office records, so they count matters on record, not fees. And a lateral move is one lawyer changing firms, never a measure of any firm's size.

The index is the sharpest signal in the media data. Los Angeles took 23.4% of moves by lawyers with a media focus, against 5.1% of all lateral moves in the market, and the index of 463 measures that gap. New York, a much bigger legal market, took 28.1% of media moves against 14.8% of all moves, an index of 190. Technology shows that each sector has its own city. Lawyers with a technology focus who changed firms joined in San Francisco at an index of 557, while Los Angeles sat at 119 for them.

The media bench also tends to stay put. Only 8.6% of media-focused lawyers who moved also changed city, against 15.9% of IP lawyers and 20.5% of all lawyers who moved. In the Sartori & Partners lateral database, Los Angeles was also the city that 19.9% of the media movers left. For a general counsel the consequence is practical: when a trusted media partner changes firms, the new desk is very often in the same city, so the relationship can follow the partner without a change of office or time zone.

Where the work is done tells the same story as where lawyers move. 16.2% of media and entertainment deals were handled with lawyers in Los Angeles, against 8.7% of technology and software deals. A separate Century City row adds 3.7% of media deals; one deal can count in both rows, so the two figures are never added. 43.4% of media deals were handled with lawyers in New York, 18.3% with lawyers in Washington, DC and 13.6% with lawyers in London. Every one of these shares covers all the sector's deals, not only its IP work, and a deal counts in each city whose lawyers worked on it.

New York still carries the sector's volume, so a media panel without it would be thin. But a panel built only in New York leaves out the city whose weight in media work stands well above its weight in technology work. Put at least one Los Angeles team on any media IP shortlist.

Intellectual property is a standing line of media work rather than an occasional add-on. IP lawyers worked on 26.3% of media and entertainment deals, against 11.1% of all dated deals and 11.3% of technology and software deals. From the practice's side, media and entertainment was the client sector on 4.8% of IP deals, 256 deals in 12 months, while the sector was the client on 2.0% of all dated deals. One deal can carry several practices, so the practice shares inside a sector overlap and are never summed.

The movers show the same tilt toward IP. Of the lawyers with a media focus who changed firms, 49.1% moved under the IP practice, an index of 663 against the market; among partners alone the index was 514. For a general counsel, this makes the IP partner a central contact on a media mandate, and the one whose next move deserves the closest watch.

The two volumes moved apart over the latest settled year. Media and entertainment deals held flat (+4.2%), from 931 in the 12 months to September 2025 to 970 in the 12 months to September 2026. IP deals across all sectors rose 20.9%, from 4,399 to 5,319, and all dated deals rose 10.6%, from 43,590 to 48,216. No trend is published for IP work in media alone, so the readings sit side by side rather than as one figure. Because the IP count includes court and trademark-office records, its rise counts matters on record, not fees.

For a media company, a steady sector volume means no surge of media matters is competing for the same partners. If pressure on IP partners' time builds, the counts point to IP work across all sectors, not to media deals. Ask how many open matters the proposed IP partner carries outside media before you sign.

Partner moves by lawyers with a media focus rose 65.0%: 60 such partners changed firms in the 12 months to September 2025 and 99 in the 12 months to September 2026. Moves at every level by media-focused lawyers rose 30.7%, from 140 to 183. The IP practice as a whole did not follow. IP lateral partner hiring held flat (+8.0%), from 326 to 352, and partner moves by lawyers with a technology focus held flat (+6.5%), from 201 to 214. The media counts are small, but the reading on them is a rise, not noise.

The media movers are also senior. Partners made 54.4% of the moves by media-focused lawyers, against 34.4% of IP moves and 27.7% of all lateral moves. For a company, more partner moves mean a higher chance that the partner running a media IP matter changes firms during it. At engagement, ask who else in the team knows the file, so the work does not stall if the partner moves.

No firm list exists for IP work in media alone. Two lists come close, and each covers more than the pair: the media list ranks advisers on all the sector's deals, M&A and capital markets included, and the IP list ranks advisers on IP deals across all sectors. The media list is headed by Latham & Watkins in the 61-100 band. The IP list is headed by Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton and Greenberg Traurig, both in the 151-250 band.

Checked name by name, two firms sit on both lists: Greenberg Traurig (4th on media, 2nd on IP) and ArentFox Schiff (6th and 5th).

These two pair a media client record with IP volume across sectors, and a shortlist can start with them. Neither list says where a firm's media IP partners sit, so ask every candidate to name its Los Angeles partners on media IP matters from the past 12 months.

Start the search in Los Angeles. 16.2% of media deals were handled with lawyers in the city, against 8.7% of technology deals, and lawyers with a media focus who changed firms joined there at an index of 463. Plan for IP as a regular part of outside work, since IP lawyers sit on 26.3% of the sector's deals against 11.1% across all deals. Track the partner, not only the firm: media-focused partner moves rose 65.0% year on year, while IP lateral partner hiring held flat (+8.0%), so the movement is particular to the media bench. Only 8.6% of media-focused movers changed city, so a relationship can usually follow a partner to a new firm without a new office. Use the two firms on both lists as a first call, and test every name on its Los Angeles media IP partners rather than on its overall rank.