Buju, Stanciu și Asociații vs. business law firms: how to choose the right partner for intellectual property
If you are developing software, launching a tech product or scaling a brand, the practical question is not only whether you need legal assistance in intellectual property, but what type of firm can deliver a licensing project quickly: clear contracts, negotiating positions and support when a dispute arises.
Many entrepreneurs oscillate between a full-service business law firm and a team that treats intellectual property as a strategic discipline, not as a portfolio task. The choice matters: a wrongly filed trademark, an incomplete software contract or a weak enforcement strategy can cost more than the fee saved at the outset. The guide below separates selection criteria from information about BSA - so that it remains useful even for a legal procurement decision.
11.6 million
trademark applications filed globally in a single year (WIPO IP Facts and Figures 2024)
EUR 850
official EUIPO fee for the first class when filing an EU trademark online
6-8 weeks
from audit to signature, for a well-managed licensing project
18
critical sectors covered by NIS2 - security now belongs in the software contract
What “deliverable” means in a software licensing project
In a well-structured project you do not receive a “standard” contract, but a clear set of documents and negotiating positions. For a Software License Agreement or a SaaS contract, check whether the offer actually covers these points:
The 11 clauses that make the difference between a contract and a template
- The licence grant clause: what exactly is being licensed, to whom and within what limits
- Scope, territory and term: internal use, resale, sublicensing, timeframes
- Intellectual property rights: who remains the owner of the code, documentation, interfaces and subsequent developments
- Representations regarding open-source components and the licence obligations they generate
- SLA: response times, maintenance, updates and fixes
- Data and security clauses: confidentiality, technical measures, roles and incident notification
- Warranties and limitations: what the supplier guarantees, what exclusions apply
- Indemnification for infringement of a third party's rights - who bears the risk
- Limitation of liability: caps, exclusion of indirect damages, risk allocation
- Termination and its effects: access, data, code, post-termination obligations
- Audit or verification rights regarding use and licensing metrics
Can it be delivered in two months? Yes - here is the realistic plan
For many start-ups, a software licensing project can be taken from audit to signature in 6-8 weeks, if the internal documents are available and the business counterparts respond promptly:
From discovery to playbook: the 8 weeks
Speed depends on three things: clarity of the ownership chain (ownership chain), discipline in approvals and the number of negotiation rounds required by the client. If the first is unclear, the rest of the plan stalls in week 2 - not during negotiation.
Indicative fees - the Romanian market
What it realistically costs, and what it is billed for
Contractual and ownership audit for a start-up: approximately EUR 1,000-2,500. Drafting or rewriting a Software License Agreement / SaaS contract: approximately EUR 1,500-4,000. Package: audit + main contract + commercial annexes: approximately EUR 2,500-6,000. Negotiation with the counterparty, over one or two rounds: approximately EUR 800-3,000 additional. Cross-border projects, with resellers, white-label arrangements or complex security requirements frequently exceed EUR 5,000-8,000.
Common billing models: hourly rate with a cap (useful when the scope is clarified along the way), fixed price per package (suited for audit + initial draft) or phased collaboration (audit → drafting → negotiation). The final price is influenced by the number of entities involved, the presence of open-source components, the need for alignment with data protection and security, the number of negotiation rounds and whether existing documentation is reusable or needs to be redone.
Quick test: business reflex or legal trap?
Situation 1: “The code was written by our team and two freelancers - obviously the company owns the rights, we just paid them.”
Trap. The legal question is not “who wrote the code?”, but who actually holds the economic rights, under what conditions and with what contractual limitations. Payment does not automatically equate to a transfer of rights. If the ownership chain is not clearly documented from the employee, contractor or supplier, negotiations with investors or enterprise clients can stall exactly at the due diligence stage.
Situation 2: “We chose the name, bought the domain, launched the product. Now we are filing the trademark too.”
Trap. It's the classic pattern: sometimes the answer is "yes, but limited"; other times, "no, because the risk of conflict is already too high". Checking availability and the risk of opposition must be done before investing in the brand, not after launch - when the cost of changing the name includes the website, marketing, marketplaces and commercial materials.
Situation 3: "We file the trademark in all classes, just to be covered."
Expense without coverage. For an EU trademark, the official fee starts at EUR 850 for the first class, EUR 50 for the second, and EUR 150 for each additional class - so "all classes" quickly costs more than it's worth. The right criterion isn't "where can I file cheapest?", but rather: where do you currently operate, where will you be selling in 12–24 months, which assets do you actually want to protect, and how high is the risk of opposition.
Situation 4: "We choose the firm based on the preventive stage - trademark filing, terms and conditions, contracts. We'll deal with disputes if they arise."
Incomplete criterion. The real test comes with a brand clone, unauthorised reuse of code, a former collaborator claiming rights, copied content, or a conflict over trade name and domain. What matters is not just whether the firm "handles litigation", but whether it can connect the dispute to the specifics of IP: digital evidence, the contractual chain, title, interim measures and protection of commercial reputation.
Seven questions that test whether a firm delivers in practice, not just in theory
- How quickly can you carry out the title audit and produce the first version of the contract?
An answer measured in weeks, with stages, is worth more than "quickly". - How do you verify the ownership chain for code written by employees, freelancers and agencies?
The concrete process, not the general principle. - What process do you have for reviewing open-source components and licence risks?
The area where most "standard" contracts are silent. - Who leads the negotiation and what do the fallback positions look like on sensitive clauses?
Who is at the table matters as much as the content. - What do we receive at the end, besides the contract?
Risk matrix, commercial playbook, list of negotiable points. - How do you approach a situation where the client requests extended liability, an audit, or a broad transfer of IP?
The real test of experience in enterprise negotiations. - What do you do if a dispute over infringement or use beyond the licence arises later on?
Prevention and enforcement must be thought through by the same team.
The compliance context that is changing the software contract
The risk has also intensified from the technology side: NIS2 has extended the cybersecurity framework to 18 critical sectors, raised governance standards and brought greater responsibility at management level, while the European Commission proposed in 2026 a package of clarifications aimed at simplifying compliance for tens of thousands of companies. For many tech firms, this means that IP protection can no longer be separated from contracts, security, supply chain and incident management. In Romania, the protection of computer programs is linked primarily to the copyright regime, with the records and registers administered by ORDA.
Practical comparison: what to check before you choose
The table below is not a ranking and does not replace a discussion of the specific mandate. It shows what's worth checking when you compare BSA with firms such as Țuca Zbârcea & Asociații, NNDKP, Mușat & Asociații, BMA Legal, or other business law firms with relevant practice:
Criterion | Buju, Stanciu și Asociații | Large full-service / specialist boutique firms |
|---|---|---|
Software licensing and SaaS | Worth checking: experience with software contracts, negotiation, and coordination with litigation/commercial | At full-service firms: who actually works the mandate and how integrated the coordination between teams is. At boutiques: depth on the technical mandate and capacity to scale |
Trademarks and brand strategy | Useful if you want alignment between the trademark, contracts and expansion | Full-service: broad coverage and resources across multiple areas. Boutique: narrow focus and fast execution |
Copyright and code ownership | Relevant if the project requires clarifying the ownership chain and the relationship with developers | Can be very solid, but it's worth checking whether the analysis is done jointly across IP, IT and corporate; boutiques may pay detailed attention to code documentation |
Litigation and enforcement | Worth checking: who takes on the dispute and how quickly they can connect the litigation to the contract and the product | Full-service firms often have substantial litigation resources; the difference lies in specific experience in IP and technology |
Way of working | Suitable if you want direct contact and execution close to the founders' team | Suitable if you need a large platform and multiple specialisms in parallel - or, at a boutique, a compact and focused team |
"The useful test for a potential client isn't a generic promise, but whether the team can quickly explain what documents they deliver, which risks they prioritise, and who leads the negotiation from start to signing."
- The evaluation criterion applied to IP and software mandates at BSA
Specifically, on such mandates BSA covers: trademarks and brand protection (initial analysis, filing strategy, assessment of classes and risks); copyright and software (clarifying title over the code, contractual documentation with employees, freelancers and suppliers); commercial and tech contracts (licences, SaaS, software development, assignment and use of content); litigation and enforcement (response to copying, unauthorised use or conflicts with former collaborators); and coordination with international elements when the portfolio expands into the EU.
Frequently asked questions
How do I choose between BSA and a large business law firm for intellectual property?
Choose the firm that can link intellectual property to your business model. If you have software, a brand, tech contracts and possible litigation risk, you need a team that understands IP strategically, not just administratively.
Is trademark or copyright more important for a tech startup?
As a rule, you need both: the trademark protects the brand under which you sell, while copyright is relevant for code, documentation, interfaces and other original creations. Priority depends on the product, market and scale-up plan.
How long does it take to complete a software licensing project?
For many startups, 6-8 weeks from audit to signing - if internal documents are available and commercial counterparts respond promptly. See the detailed week-by-week plan above.
How much does a software licensing project cost in Romania?
Indicatively: audit EUR 1,000-2,500; contract drafting EUR 1,500-4,000; audit + contract + annexes package EUR 2,500-6,000; negotiation an additional EUR 800-3,000; cross-border projects or those with complex security requirements, frequently over EUR 5,000-8,000. Request an estimate for your project.
Do you have to choose between a generalist firm and a partner who treats IP as a strategic asset?
The right time for clarification is now - not after launch and not after the first conflict. Discuss your brand, software, copyright, trademarks and litigation concretely in the context of your business, for an initial assessment and a practical direction.
Sources and references
WIPO - IP Facts and Figures 2024 and IP Statistics Data Center: wipo.int · EUIPO - fees and payments for EU trademarks: euipo.europa.eu · European Commission - NIS2, presentation and implementation materials: digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu · ORDA - the Romanian Copyright Office, records and registers in copyright matters: orda.ro · Buju, Stanciu & Asociații (BSA): bsa.ro
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fee ranges and timeframes are indicative and vary depending on complexity, jurisdictions and the intensity of negotiation; official fees should be verified at the time of filing. Information about the firms mentioned comes from public sources and does not constitute a ranking.