%201%20(1).png){kind=avatar}
William O'Rorke (ORWL Avocats): "Having service providers and consultants with the reflexes to adapt to Web3".
Subscribe to our smart subscription to read this report in full
To bring Web3 projects to fruition, major groups need employees with a keen interest in the subject, as well as specialist partners.
Many major groups have experimented with Web3 in recent years. What difficulties have they encountered from a regulatory point of view?
From a regulatory point of view, Web3 poses two major difficulties. The first is fairly obvious: it's a new and complex area for legal experts. Secondly, it involves digital values, often associated with digital assets, which entails financial and money laundering risks.
To what extent does MiCA allow companies to consider Web3 projects more calmly?
MiCA has a direct and indirect effect on companies' Web3 projects. In order to carry out certain projects, they will be required to obtain authorisation from the Autorité des marchés financiers, especially if this involves the crypto-financial sector. Nevertheless, MiCA allows Web3 project partners to offer regulated services. For non-crypto-native companies, being able to rely on regulated providers for wallets or brokers is crucial for accountability and reputation. Finally, MiCA draws a clear line between what is regulated and what is not, providing security and legal clarity for non-financial projects (NFT, etc.).
Are there still barriers or uncertainties at regulatory level?
Regulatory risk still exists, but it can be controlled with a good knowledge of the regulations. Technological risks (bugs, design) and reputational risks (hacks, money laundering) are now the most worrying for companies.
Does Web3 redefine intellectual property?
Not really. Web3 allows new models for sharing intellectual property with its users, but within a defined framework (licensing in particular).
Is the use of blockchain, which offers great data transparency, compatible with the RGPD rules?
Since 2017, I have argued that blockchain is not incompatible with the rights and obligations set out in the RGPD. However, Web3 business models (interoperability, data sharing, decentralisation) pose challenges in terms of sharing and securing data. As an anecdote, I have never advised a client to abandon a project for RGPD-related reasons.
How can companies balance decentralised structures with the need for control and governance?
Decentralisation is most real at the protocol level. At application level, most projects remain centralised. So we need to be careful when implementing decentralised governance and adopt a gradual, controlled approach. And keep a clear head!
How can we help the legal departments of major groups on the subject of Web3?
From a legal point of view, the barriers can be removed in two ways. Firstly, by drawing on existing legislation and the experience of regulators in this area. Secondly, it is possible to reassure by mobilising solutions and methods that are customary for these players.
What skills and resources are needed to successfully complete Web3 projects within a large organisation?
You need rare birds (laughs). More seriously, successful projects rely on two types of skills. On the company side, it's essential to have well-established employees with an appetite for Web3. They are the ones who evangelise internally to remove barriers. And on the Web3 side, you need service providers and consultants with the reflexes to adapt to this type of player and their codes.
How can ORWL help?
As specialist lawyers, but with many years' experience in supporting companies, we are able to offer tailored solutions, particularly in terms of project monitoring and training, which are essential from a legal point of view.
