Disruption or Dud? The Questions That Will Define Blockchain's Legal Future
Blockchain is still in its early days, but over the course of the next 10 years the technology could have a significant impact on both the economy and the way legal businesses operate.
February 05, 2020 at 11:00 AM
3 minute read
Day two of Legalweek 2020 kicked off with a talk from part-time keynote speaker and full-time blockchain and emerging technology researcher Bettina Warburg. Her presentation covered topics ranging from the implications blockchain could have for the digital economy to how it might change the work done by e-discovery professionals.
For the uninitiated, blockchain was defined by Warburg as computers in the cloud that anyone can build applications on top of and no one can control. It's a subject in which Warburg is well versed. She co-founded and acts as managing partner of the early stage venture capital fund Warburg Serres Investments, which according to her bio is focused on "the decentralization of trade and Blockchain Technology."
Wednesday's keynote address focused primarily on the next 10 years, eschewing cryptocurrencies in favor of addressing the systemic change blockchain is poised to bring to the way organizations across industries conduct business. All of that essentially begins with the ability to program and encode transactions that various parties are certain will be executed as written.
"It's not just about being digital, it's about allowing a whole new consumer class," Warburg said.
For the legal industry specifically, this could have a significant impact on the way that law firms or corporate legal departments approach their work while also raising some difficult new questions. While blockchain's ability to maintain what Warburg qualified as a stable and persistent network could be a boon to e-discovery-related preservation efforts, that kind of immortality tends to fly directly in the face of most privacy regimes, including the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation.
Those concerns bled into another key blockchain area that Warburg recommended folks in the legal industry keep an eye on: compliance innovation. Here, she argued that blockchain could work to the benefit of both the regulators and the entities they are regulating. For example, blockchain could potentially allow for real-time compliance audits to take place to ensure that various privacy rules are being followed as intended. Meanwhile, businesses can deploy blockchain solutions to ensure that compliance efforts are being encoded and automatically executed the right way.
That in turn could only be a small window into how blockchain could ultimately transform the way that law firms are run. Smart contracts already allow for certain terms or conditions to be triggered or executed automatically upon signature. Warburg broached the possibility of the eventual rise of completely automated firms or other businesses.
"These are opportunities where we do need to imagine what kind of business functions machines are going to start taking over," Warburg said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1People in the News—Jan. 8, 2025—Stevens & Lee, Ogletree Deakins
- 2How I Made Partner: 'Avoid Getting Stuck in a Moment,' Says Federico Cuadra Del Carmen of Baker McKenzie
- 3Legal Departments Dinged for Acquiescing to Rate Hikes That 'Defy Gravity'
- 4Spalding Jurors Return $12M Verdict Against State Farm Insurance Client
- 5Special Series Part 3: The Statutory Guardrails Violate the Majority Vote Rule
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250