The Prof G Pod with Scott Galloway - Office Hours: The Metaverse, NFTs, and Web3 — with Tonya Evans

Episode Date: April 25, 2022

Tonya Evans, professor of law at Penn State Dickinson Law School, returns to the Pod to discuss the state of play in the metaverse, and where intellectual property laws come in. She and Scott also answer listener questions on NFTs as investment vehicles, cryptocurrency regulations, and what makes Web3 different from Web2.0. Follow Professor Evans on Twitter @IPProfEvans. Music: https://www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for this show comes from Constant Contact. If you struggle just to get your customers to notice you, Constant Contact has what you need to grab their attention. Constant Contact's award-winning marketing platform offers all the automation, integration, and reporting tools that get your marketing running seamlessly, all backed by their expert live customer support. It's time to get going and growing with Constant Contact today.

Ready, set, grow. Go to ConstantContact.ca and start your free trial today. Go to ConstantContact.ca for your free trial. ConstantContact.ca Support for PropG comes from NerdWallet. Starting your slash learn more to over 400 credit cards. Head over to nerdwallet.com forward slash learn more to find smarter credit cards, savings accounts, mortgage rates, and more. NerdWallet. Finance smarter. NerdWallet Compare Incorporated.

NMLS 1617539. Welcome to a special episode of the PropG Pod's Office Hours. This is the part of the show where we answer questions about business, big tech, entrepreneurship, and whatever else is on your mind today. We're bringing back one of our favorite PropG podcast, Professor Tanya Evans, to help us make sense of the metaverse and the current role of IP law, cryptocurrencies, and NFTs in our financial system. We'll also take listener questions together later in the show. That's right, bringing on someone who actually knows how to answer these queries.

These young minds deserve someone with some domain expertise. Anyway, so let's light this candle. Professor Evans, welcome back. Where does this podcast find you? It finds me somewhere just north of the metaverse, actually. So this is very fortunate. Some lingo there.

All right. In this universe where we have geography, what city would you be in? Or where are you, Professor? I'll put it this way. I'm in California right now. I'm in California. Nice. Good for you. In these crypto streets, we don't really like to say specifically where. Yeah, I get it. I get it. So a lot has happened since we last spoke. We had you on for an interview in July to discuss the state of play in DeFi and NFTs. And the space has evolved rapidly since then. And we're now in an

era of the metaverse. Walk us through the current state of play around, quote unquote, the metaverse. What are your thoughts? It's no surprise to me what's going on and by what's going on, the insane valuations in the space. And I think maybe even just saying, you know, what today's version of a definition is, or at least my understanding, I was in a Twitter space recently. I wish I could attribute this to the right person, but person, if you're listening and you said this, this resonated with me. He compared the description of the World Wide Web of the information superhighway and how people used to talk about, you know, the World Wide Web in that way. And he analogized the metaverse and kind of Web3, and I know we're going to talk about that, to the value superhighway, the extreme and rapid

acceleration of the transfer of value around the world and creating virtual ecosystems that support value so it's not one place or one space, but an ecosystem that facilitates the more rapid or more accelerated transfer of digital types of value in the same way that information started moving at a dramatically accelerated way in a Web 2.0 world. The NFTs have hit a bit of a bump, right? I mean, it seems to me the high watermark, at least over the last year, was kind of, I don't know, I don't know if it's a speed bump or if it's the call at the top, but Melania Trump's NFTs, it appears it was a fake wallet set up to try and send false signals around the value of these NFTs. NFT values and trading has actually declined since then. Do you see this as a speed bump or the beginning of the end for NFTs? And folks have also been talking about the tweet, Jack's tweet that went for a gazillion million and now I don't think it's going to pass for maybe more than five figures. I didn't look today, but maybe valuation or values, I should say, not valuation of subjective creativity. We could say the same thing about a painting or collectibles

up and down. And one particular property or the fact of whatever it's going to sell for, I don't think at this point in time is indicative of the entire space. It's one thing if Jack is selling for charity his own tweet. For the next person, maybe the community has not coalesced around the piece. Maybe it was more about the moment. Maybe it's more about FOMO. Maybe it was more about being the first, right? So maybe it's testing the secondary market for one piece of social media history at a moment in time that just isn't the same. They aren't the same market dynamics. There isn't the same community groundswell around that.

So I say all that to say, when you think about art in general or collectibles in general, it's highly subjective. It's driven by community. But with art, we know that it only really takes one willing buyer at the time someone is ready to sell. Maybe that's not the right time. Maybe this is not the right property. I see people still doing well with NFTs. And what does well mean?

Someone can sell enough to pay off a student loan or maybe just pay rent. They consider that a success and everything's not going to sell for $69 million. So I know that it has cooled and we have these very unfortunate and concerning instances where people are inflating the prices behind the scenes. I think that's problematic for the space. But one might say that the art, the physical art world is very opaque as well. And there's probably more transparency in the digital space, just by the very nature of blockchain and the way that coins and tokens move. I thought one of the most exciting things about NFTs is that they might represent a huge opportunity for high margin, incremental cash flow for media companies, for sporting teams,

for luxury brands, that if Hermes or Chanel can wrap their arms around the IP component of this and ensure that no one can have a Chanel bag or a Birkin bag without paying some money to those organizations, that it could be just an enormously accretive to shareholder value. Have you given any thought or additional thought to IP as it relates to a company or media firms or sporting teams' ability to monetize NFTs in the metaverse? Yeah, this is a really important thing for brands, and we're going to continue to see more and more brands move into the space. So when I think of unlocking liquidity, reimagining and giving new life to IP that has been sitting on the proverbial shelf and other markets and opportunities, not only in a particular country, but around the world, can be very empowering for incumbent brands if they can figure it out and to do so quickly and meet the moment of where we are

in the development of the technology and the enthusiasm around it, even given some of the ebbs and flows that we just spoke about. The other side of that is what happens when there are others who are actually infringing as a matter of copyright. That's always going to be important and it's obvious. The less obvious, but as important, if not more important to brands, is going to be how do they protect their trademarks in the space. And so there's been this really interesting conversation among intellectual property lawyers and other lawyers working in the space. Recently, Nike sued, I think the company's name is StockX, sued StockX for this trademark infringement. Long story short, StockX is using prominently the Nike brand.

StockX is arguing, we actually have the physical shoe and someone is buying a digital representation of ownership of this specific shoe, which will conveniently keep in a vault here, but you'll have it in case, right? So it's like backed by the physical property as a way to do an end run around these arguments about the misappropriation and misuse and infringement of the trademark. I think we'll see more of that with other brands as we start to see an unauthorized connection of an NFT, perhaps to a physical good and how this will work itself out. So it'll be interesting to see how the Nike case goes. All right. Thanks for that. Why don't we do this? Let's bring in some of our listeners. You'll get an opportunity to hear from some of our dozens and dozens of

fans, Professor. We're going to take a quick break before taking a few listener questions about NFTs, decentralization, and cryptocurrency regulation. We'll be right back. The Capital Ideas Podcast now features a series hosted by Capital Group CEO, Mike Gitlin. Through the words and experiences of investment professionals, you'll discover what differenti experiences of investment professionals, you'll discover what differentiates their investment approach, what learnings have shifted their career trajectories, and how do they find their next great idea. Invest 30 minutes in an episode today.

Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts. Published by Capital Client Group, Inc. Hey, it's Scott Galloway. And on our podcast, Pivot, we are bringing you a special series Published by Capital Cleson, the senior AI reporter for The Verge, to give you a primer on how to integrate AI into your life. So tune into AI Basics, How and When to Use AI, a special series from Pivot sponsored by AWS, wherever you get your podcasts. Welcome back. Question number one. Hello, Professor Galloway. My name is Tyler. I'm a 2011 Stern graduate coming to you from the Lower West Side of Manhattan, Kansas. I'm interested in getting your opinion on NFT art and the opportunity to use it as an investment vehicle. At Stern, we learned that art was an asset class that is not correlated as well with the economy as other asset classes. And during a recession, can actually appreciate well, whereas other asset classes won't. Seems like NFT art is blowing up these days.

Is this Bitcoin where Bitcoin was three years ago? Would you recommend going out and getting some pieces on Nifty Gateway or OpenSea? How do you see this as an investment vehicle? Professor, your thoughts? So it's interesting to make the comparison. When I think about the diversification of a portfolio and when I think of high net worth individuals in particular who like to leverage maybe anywhere from two to seven percent of a portfolio in art and hold it for a long period of time. And the idea that over time, given what may happen to an artist or an artist's collection and notability, the idea of holding long and engaging with community. A great example of that is Micah Johnson, who has created this

character called Aku. It's a great example of how a new NFT artist is kind of bridging the divide between traditional notions of ownership matched with the current notions of community and the intrigue and excitement around and the value of NFTs and NFT projects. I hesitate to compare the experience of NFTs, which are necessarily unique by their nature, with something that is like Bitcoin, a separate fungible crypto asset, I get the question in the sense of, are we seeing the evolution of something that we'll appreciate over time? But lumping all NFTs, which are inherently unique into one basket, is a difficult proposition, as opposed to seeing the price, for example, of something like Bitcoin increasing historically since

2009 in value over time. I happen to be bullish on NFTs. I think it's a great way to dabble and get to know the crypto space without losing your shirt necessarily in the process if you're more interested in being curious about the space and wanting to participate, support an artist, and involve yourself in a community. Tyler, yeah, I think a bet on art more broadly is a bet on the top 1% and the 1% continues to engage in regulatory capture and there is no asset class that's done better over the last

50 years than the top 1%. So betting on art is sort of betting on the top 1% of my understanding as it has outperformed most other asset classes. I would not put more than, you know, a young person, I wouldn't put more than 10% of your net worth into any one asset class. I'm similar to Professor Bullish on NFTs, and I think there's always, it might seem a little bit crazy, but I think you should always, especially when you're young, be open to risk for asymmetric upside on something like this. I would suggest going into a fund or a collection. I think it is very difficult. You really need to understand this market because I think it's similar to the token market. I would imagine the majority of NFTs and maybe even 99% plus will end up being worthless. But I buy into the notion that young people find value in digital assets that my generation has trouble assigning value to,

whether it's skins or different types of weapons. And if one specific artist or artists or platform can do what Bitcoin has done, and that is create a credible sense of scarcity. I have one piece of art. It's a Grayson Perry. I think he did 250 prints. He signed each one of them. So I don't see any reason why having a deed or digital signature on an NFT wouldn't be able to create the same sort of value. So by all means, take a small amount of your net worth. Unless you know the art market, I would suggest, or you know the NFT market, I would suggest trying to go invest in or behind a fund that claims they have some understanding here. But yeah,

why not? Next question. Hey, Scott. My name is Evan, and I'm a student at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ontario. My question for you is about the current state of the cryptocurrency market. As the market for cryptocurrencies grows, governments around the world will have to take a stance on the use of cryptocurrencies to conduct transactions. One big concern that they'll have to consider in this decision is how easy cryptocurrencies make it to conduct illegal activities, such as money laundering and financing terrorist organizations. So my question for you is, do you think that creating regulations for

cryptocurrencies will instill confidence about the security and stability of the cryptocurrency market? Professor? So I think the regulation in this space, I have a lot to say about this, but I will make it plain and make it brief. I think there's a lot of money sitting on the sidelines, impatiently waiting to get in, and would strongly benefit from clarity. I believe very strongly in regulating harms, not the technology. So I always get a little concerned when we start to talk about regulation. That being said, I want laws and I want regulations to work optimally. That's a high notion in order to obviously protect investors and consumers in this space, but at the same time to encourage and support innovation. A lot of education continues to go on in the Hill in order to meet the need for protections with also establishing open

markets and also protecting the innovation. So as long as we're regulating harms, I think that would lead to the clarity that traditional finance and the existing legacy system would be in making it even easier for the average person to participate. Right now, high net worth individuals are quietly being exposed in a de-risk environment from every place from JP Morgan to Deutsche Bank and everything in between. Why is it quiet? Because that is kind of replicating the existing structure to protect high net worth individuals, where crypto really exists for the other 99% to have an equal access to capital markets. Crypto is taxed as a capital asset and also to participate in the future of money and the future of wealth. So I say all that to say, hopefully the clarity will support certainly existing structures, I think, for critics of crypto

is it's used to fund terrorism and kidnappings. And the reality is, is a percentage of total trading volume, I think illicit activity has actually declined. But it's still, you're hearing about these massive hacks. I would argue that if any successful market needs a certain amount of protocols, I've never understood people who become billionaires on the wealth of their stocks and then decide to start heckling at the SEC. If it wasn't for the SEC and the rule of fair play, our markets would not attract capital from all four corners of the earth, which they do. And the SEC is kind of that sheriff. So everybody loves the sheriff while they're growing up. And then once they get, you know,

once they have their own ranch and their own cattle, they decide the sheriff is a menace. I think regulation would benefit the whole ecosystem. Let's go to the next question. Hey, Prof G, this is Ross calling from the north of England, actually quite close to our shared ancestral heritage of the mighty Scotland. And my question is, what makes Web3 any different from a Web2 on steroids? Now, people seem to think

it will bring decentralized experiences and a lot of the kind of crypto communities talk about this. But so far, I can only see more centralization in the hands of the few that already have that and actually grow that stronger under this kind of brand of Web3. Your thoughts, Professor? Well, I would actually, I get the question. I think it's a fair question to be sure. this wonderful utopia of decentralization in a Web 3.0 world eventually coalesced, as the caller suggests, into of the crypto ecosystem, decentralized finance, the metaverse, and all of the other Web3 technologies, we're talking AR, VR, 3D printing, and the like,

there is the great opportunity to create what we used to talk about when the build for Web2 was coming. Computers talking to each other and the rapid exchange on a peer-to-peer basis and where we find ourselves now is quite different when we think of the fangs of the world or the fangs as being the world. As the technology currently exists, the major impediment to actually participate is actually education. It's not a gatekeeper at this point. And so I'd spend my time, obviously,

as a law professor, an attorney, and an educator in the space, focusing on that. Because if the only impediment today is participation and being educated in autonomy and participating on your own terms, let's keep talking about it every year and see if this is the great disappointment or the great opportunity. Yeah. So, Ross, we are brothers from another mother on this. And literally, we might be brothers from another mother because there aren't that many people in Scotland. My dad was raised in Glasgow, so chances are we're related. By the way, I'm buying the Glasgow Rangers, Professor Evans. You'll sit in my owner's box. The Glasgow Rangers is the finest football or, as we call it, soccer team

in Scotland. By the way, Elon Musk doesn't like me. He's been tweeting mean things about me this morning, but Canadians and the Scottish, oh my God, they love the dog. Anyway, Web 2.0 versus Web 3.0, I 100% agree with this guy. I see crypto, DAOs and NFTs is just basically another technology innovation we're hoping for. But the whole wrap that's supposed to distinguish Web3 is this notion of decentralization or power to the people away from the Web2 players, specifically Facebook, Google, and Amazon. I think this notion that people would design their own algorithms on Twitter is ridiculous, given the majority of us don't even clear our cookies. And it strikes me that when you have one or 2% of accounts or wallets holding 90% of Bitcoin and you have more

dual-class shareholders and super voting stock at Coinbase, that this crypto bro is someone who preaches about decentralization in hopes that he too can centralize massive amounts of wealth. I would think a better name for it would just be Web 2.0001. It's the same shit. It's just different technologies. Not to say there won't be innovation here, but Web 3, as far as I can tell, is mostly a branding technique. Anyways, Professor Tanya Evans is a professor at Penn State Dickinson Law. She's also the founder of Advantage Evans Academy, an inclusive online crypto education and onboarding platform and the host of the Tech Intersect podcast, a weekly podcast that highlights new and notable experts at the intersections of law, business, and technology. She was recently

named to the American Bar Association's Woman of Legal Tech 2022 list. Professor Evans also earned a spot on the Forbes 50 over 50 investment list for 2021. She joins us from somewhere in California. Very, very mysterious, Professor Evans. It is always great to catch up with you. Thanks for joining us. Absolutely. I look forward to the next time. That's all for this episode. Again, if you'd like to submit a question, please submit a voice recording by visiting officehours.propgmedia.com. Again, that's officehours.propgmedia.com. We really do love your questions. Our producers are Caroline Chagrin and Drew Burrows. Claire Miller is our associate producer.

If you like what you heard, please follow, download and subscribe. Thank you for listening to the PropGPod from the Vox Media Podcast Network. We will catch you on Thursday. with 37% seeing significant or extremely high positive impact on revenue growth. In Alex Partners' 2024 Digital Disruption Report, you can learn the best path to turning that disruption into growth for your business. With a focus on clarity, direction, and effective implementation, Alex Partners provides essential support when decisive leadership is crucial. You can discover insights like these by reading Alex Partners' latest technology industry insights, Thank you. disruption, businesses trust Alex Partners to get straight to SMS, and more, making every moment count. Over 100,000 brands trust Klaviyo's unified data and marketing platform to build smarter

digital relationships with their customers during Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and beyond. Make every moment count with Klaviyo. Learn more at klaviyo.com slash BFCM.