Q&A: Ripple GC on Cryptocurrency, the Law and Blockchain Hype
"Just because you have a new technology doesn't mean that no laws apply to it," says Ripple general counsel Brynly Llyr.
November 01, 2017 at 07:22 PM
4 minute read
SAN FRANCISCO — The world of cryptocurrencies may seem like a lawless, financial Wild West. But for the general counsel of a blockchain company focused on moving money internationally, it's anything but.
In this excerpt from an interview on Law.com's ”Unprecedented” podcast, Ripple Labs GC Brynly Llyr talks about navigating the complex regulatory environment facing cryptocurrencies like XRP—and how a lot of her time is focused on relatively straightforward issues like intellectual property and contracts. Llyr also gives her views on the hype around blockchain in the legal profession.
Listen to the full interview here, or subscribe on your iOS or Android device. The transcript has been edited for length and clarity.
Ben Hancock: There's been a lot of controversy over cryptocurrencies. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the government of China have taken steps to either curb trading in cryptocurrencies or initial coin offerings. But I want to move a little past that and ask about the biggest legal issues you face day-to-day in this space.
Brynly Llyr: I don't know if we can just step over ICOs and some of those other issues. It's not day-to-day, but those are definitely big legal issues in this space. In my mind, it comes down to something that is kind of a simple concept. And that is: Just because you have a new technology doesn't mean that no laws apply to it.
It is a new way of doing things, absolutely. But going back to that example of using our technology to help banks move funds cross-border. Well, it's a new technology, but it doesn't mean that all of those things that we care about related to moving money around—like anti-money laundering and terrorist financing—those considerations don't go away just because we have a new technology. And to think that they do is pretty simplistic.
My understanding is that the banking sector is a lot like the legal sector, in that it's not super prone to racing ahead and jumping on the bandwagon with new technologies. Is that what you're finding?
Banks are by nature, I think, more conservative institutions.
And that is not a bad thing, absolutely not a bad thing. And correspondent banking has been around a long time. But that said, if you've had an experience with the banking system—two days, four days, this batching system and how we go about moving about moving payments— we can improve that, and I think even banks are seeing this can be improved. Not just because of efficiency, but just to bring down the error rate. They need to stay competitive as well.
I've asked you about some of the things you do day-to-day. If there are one or two big legal issues that you're looking at right now, what are they?
Well, we're a technology company, so IP and IP protection is a big deal for us, of course. Our trademarks around the world, our patent, our patent portfolio. That becomes very important.
How we are rolling out new products, and that we have really thoughtful product counseling along the way—that we're thinking about how that product will sit in the different regulatory regimes. That takes up a lot of our time. Our commercial deals, we have a number of new customers all the time, and so there's a lot of commercial work that comes with that.
There's been a lot of, I guess “hype” is the right word in the legal community about how you can take blockchain out of the cryptocurrency context and into other contexts, whether its contracts or other legal applications. What are your thoughts about that?
There is a lot of hype right now, I would say, in blockchain—this idea that we can apply it to everything and it's going to make everything better. Well, no. I mean, let's just roll it back to these core concepts: we have a shared ledger, there's transparency, there's certainty.
OK, if these are the core concepts that make up blockchain, what systems would benefit from that kind of technology? I think about selling your house, and chain of title for a property. Yeah, that's a good use for a blockchain. Identity? That could be a great technology for identity and tracking identity. And some other things. But it's not going to work for everything.
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 AllFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
DOJ Files Antitrust Suit Against Visa Alleging It Thwarts Payment-Processing Rivals
Trending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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