Home / People / John Enser
Portrait of John Enser

John Enser

Partner

CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP
Cannon Place
78 Cannon Street
London
EC4N 6AF
United Kingdom
Languages English

John provides commercial, regulatory and copyright law advice to clients across the Technology, Media and Communications sector, in particular, those offering music and audio-visual content via digital platforms.  He has been at the forefront of digital media developments for nearly 30 years, assisting clients to launch new and innovative services across a range of technologies; from the dawn of satellite television, through the birth of the worldwide web to today’s multi-channel synchronised offerings across broadcast TV, tablets, smartphones and all other forms of connected device.

John has a particular expertise in the licensing of music rights (both individually and collectively) and has represented parties in leading UK Copyright Tribunal cases involving the licensing of music for use in CDs, DVDs, in online and mobile music, in broadcast and in on-demand television.  He has also been involved in establishing licensing models for other types of music use, including in various aspects of the leisure sector.

His clients include broadcasters and other content aggregators and distributors, record companies, pure-play digital content businesses and mobile operators as well as companies that invest in the sector.

more less

John Enser is a copyright and media regulation expert and advises businesses on the distribution of audio-visual content on digital platforms. He is described by various sources as a "big hitter in the media space."

Chambers UK 2017

Industry luminary John Enser has a wide-ranging practice, incorporating strengths in music, broadcasting and digital work. Clients note that he "never ceases to amaze with the breadth and depth of his knowledge on all the hot topics in the industry." Recent work includes advising the French Press Association on a EUR60 million fund to finance new digital projects.

Chambers UK 2015

John Enser has wide-ranging expertise across broadcasting and digital platforms. He is acclaimed for his regulatory and copyright work, and for handling particularly innovative matters.

Chambers UK 2016

John Enser's highlights include advising ITV on a Copyright Tribunal royalties case involving the PRS and MCPS. Sources describe him as a keen participant in digital media matters, noting his confident negotiation style.

Chambers and Partners 2013

Head of music John Enser stands out for his 'depth of industry knowledge and ability to handle complex transactions'.

Legal 500 UK 2014

‘No one is better in the media world’ than John Enser and his colleague, according to one client. Enser brings ‘an unrivalled depth of knowledge to deals’.

Legal 500 UK 2015

The ‘excellent, responsive and creative’ team draws on expertise from a variety of practices in the firm, and has particular strength in media rights. Highlights include advising the ICC on a media rights tender, and its broadcast partnership with Star India and Star Middle East. Clients recommend John Enser.

Legal 500 UK 2015

The ‘extremely clever’ John Enser acted for Viacom on the outsourcing of the Channel 5 advertising sales and sponsorship function to Sky Media.

Legal 500 UK 2016

The firm has a reputation for achieving excellence in a range of cases and receives a multitude of client praise. “The partners we mostly use are John Enser and Victoria Gaskell. We rate them very highly - both are experts in media law and are real assets on complex media transactions,” noted one client.

Media Law International 2016: UK

Relevant experience

  • ITV on a Copyright Tribunal reference challenging the terms on which the Performing Right Society and Mechanical-Copyright Protection Society license ITV's use of music in its programmes / services.
  • 72 Films, headed by senior TV industry figures, David Glover and Mark Raphael, on distribution arrangements connected with the minority equity investment made by BBC Worldwide into the company.
  • A major sports rights body on regulatory and content aspects of the global roll out of a digital content offering.
  • Ministry of Sound Group on vendor due diligence and the commercial aspects of the sale of its iconic label Ministry of Sound Recordings to Sony Music UK. The deal sees Sony Music UK acquire the label and its stable of artists, back catalogue and compilations business. 
  • Viacom International Media Networks on an extension of its advertising sales relationship with Sky in the UK and Ireland. The arrangement originally negotiated by John in 2009 covered Viacom’s popular portfolio of 17 TV channels – including Comedy Central, MTV, Nickelodeon and VH1.  In 2015, the agreement was extended to include Channel 5 and its associated channels, following Viacom’s 2014 acquisition of Channel 5. Sky Media, Sky’s advertising sales division was also appointed to represent Channel 5’s sponsorship, digital and on-demand sales.
  • Football clubs on music licensing issues.
  • UK Music (the collective body representing the collective interests of the recorded, published and live arms of the British music industry) on a judicial review of the UK Government’s implementation of the private copying exception to copyright, on the grounds that it was inconsistent with the EU Copyright Directive.  The claim was successful and as a result, the private copying exception was quashed.
  • The International Cricket Council (ICC) on the media rights tender, bidding and evaluation process that led the ICC to conclude cricket's biggest-ever global broadcast partnership.  The partnership sees the ICC jointly award its audio-visual rights for ICC events from 2015 to 2023, including two ICC Cricket World Cups in 2019 and 2023, to Star India and Star Middle East. Star India and Star Middle East are subsidiaries of 21st Century Fox, Inc.
  • BT on its wholesale arrangement with Virgin Media enabling the latter to make the BT sports channels available to Virgin’s TV customers.
  • Heron on a naming rights agreement, leading to the renaming of the iconic Heron Tower to Salesforce Tower London.
  • Viacom International Media Networks on the commercial and regulatory media aspects of its acquisition of Channel 5 Broadcasting Limited for £450 million.
  • what3words, the location reference platform, on a range of commercial and IP matters.
  • QSoft Consulting, owner of the “Gaydar” and “Gaydar Radio” brands on a range of commercial and regulatory matters, leading to a transaction to transfer the Gaydar Radio OFCOM DAB broadcasting licenses to Gaydio, the UK's first FM gay radio station.
  • Zeebox on a complex technology arrangement under which (alongside a corporate investment) Sky UK is licensed to integrate zeebox's technology into its own companion screen applications and Sky's advertising-sales house, Sky Media, is appointed to sell Zeebox’s sponsorship and product placement opportunities.
  • Chrysalis plc on commercial aspects of the terms of the recommended cash offer for its entire share capital from a wholly-owned subsidiary of BMG Luxco, a joint venture between Bertelsmann and an affiliate of US private equity house Kohlberg Kravis Roberts.
  • Chrysalis plc on commercial aspects of its acquisition of First State Media Group.
more less

Memberships & Roles

  • Chairman, TV against Piracy Group
  • Chair of Copyright Working Group, British Screen Advisory Council
  • Royal Television Society
  • Fellow, Royal Society of the Arts
more less

Publications

  • Commercial Communications (Chapter) in Media Law & Practice (Goldberg, Sutter and Walden), Oxford University Press (1st Edition 2009, 2nd Edition forthcoming).
  • “The EU's Digital Single Market Proposals: Audiovisual Media, Geo-blocking and Telecoms Regulatory Proposals” in International Comparative Law Guide to Telecoms, Media and Internet Laws & Regulations 2017
  • Credited contributor to "Follow the Money: Financial options to assist in the battle against online piracy", a discussion paper on tackling advertising revenue from illegal websites published by Mike Weatherley MP, Intellectual Property Adviser to the British Prime Minister, 2014
more less

Lectures list

  • “Digital Single Market and Brexit” 10th Internet & Social Media Law Conference, IBC/Informa, December 2016
  • “Making sure you are privacy compliant when handling consumer and viewing data”; presentation at a private symposium for a major international TV and broadband company, November 2016
  • Brexit, a Survival Guide (for the TV industry) - panel at MIPCOM, Cannes, October 2016
  • ‘Brexit’ and the implications for the UK Music Industry – panel at the Annual Conference of the BPI (UK recorded music trade association)
  • ‘The legal landscape: will a future independent UK policy framework help or hinder the music industry?’ at Westminster Media Forum: Next steps for the UK music industry - monetisation, policy challenges and the future of live, July 2016
  • "The Digital Single Market programme: impact on film and TV investors" for Ingenious Media Group, June 2016
  • "Digital Copyright: Shaping New Law into Solution-Focused Advice for Clients", White Paper Conferences (Chair), June 2016
  • The Legal and Regulatory Challenges for Digital; Citi's annual Internet and Digital Conference, London, May 2016
  • Intellectual Property (IP) Transactions: Law and Practice, UCL Institute for Brand and Innovation Law (2015, 2016, forthcoming)
  • European Policy for Intellectual Property 10th Annual Conference (EPIP 2015), Glasgow “Copyright and Geography” (Chair)
more less

Education

  • 1989 – Admitted as a Solicitor in England and Wales
  • 1986 – Law Society Finals (Distinction), College of Law, Chester
  • 1985 – BA (Hons) Jurisprudence, Pembroke College, Oxford
more less

Feed

Show only
30 April 2021
The guide to NFTs – sold as an NFT
What is an NFT? We sus­pect that if you’re read­ing this, then you’ve prob­ably at least heard of Bit­coin or Eth­er be­fore.What about tokens? Some­where across the in­ter­net (or life, but prob­ably the in­ter­net) people may have used the term ‘token’ to de­scribe crypto­cur­ren­cies like Bit­coin and Eth­er. It’s un­der­stand­able — but it’s not strictly true as there are some dif­fer­ences between tokens and crypto­cur­ren­cies like BTC and ETH.Pop­u­lar cryp­tos such as BTC and ETH run on their own block­chain. Con­versely, tokens are nat­ive cur­ren­cies which are cre­ated/dis­trib­uted as part of pro­jects which piggy­back off an­oth­er block­chain. Those pro­jects ef­fect­ively use that par­tic­u­lar block­chain as a host in­stead of run­ning off its own main­net. Oh, and it’s im­port­ant to re­mem­ber that tokens is­sued on the block­chain are di­git­al rep­res­ent­a­tions of a wide range of as­sets — you can’t phys­ic­ally touch these as­sets be­cause they live in the di­git­al world. In fact, cryp­tos like BTC and ETH are ex­actly the same. But you already knew that.The Eth­ereum block­chain is a real hot­spot for these types of pro­jects: Dapps (or if you’re really mad at it you can call it by its full name, dis­trib­uted apps).You may have heard this one really cool fea­ture of block­chain tech — that it provides real trans­par­ency over the pro­cess of re­cord­ing trans­ac­tions. We say real trans­par­ency, be­cause once you up­load in­form­a­tion on the block­chain, it’s there un­til the end of time for every­one to see and gives some ser­i­ous mean­ing to #no­fil­ter. But there’s an­oth­er cool thing that the Eth­ereum block­chain is known for: smart con­tracts. Without smart con­tracts, there are no Dapps, and hon­estly, what’s a world without Dapps?Here’s an­oth­er piece to the Eth­ereum/Dapps puzzle — there are a bunch of dif­fer­ent com­puters around the world called val­id­at­ors which are giv­en the job of val­id­at­ing all trans­ac­tions that go through the block­chain. This job is very en­ergy in­tens­ive so any­one who par­ti­cip­ates in keep­ing the (block­chain) com­munity thriv­ing is giv­en an in­cent­ive to do so. Enter tokens.When a val­id­at­or — let’s call it Bob — val­id­ates a trans­ac­tion, Bob gets giv­en a re­ward for car­ry­ing out that task. This re­ward is in the form of the nat­ive cryp­to­graph­ic token of a par­tic­u­lar pro­ject. If, for ex­ample, Bob par­ti­cip­ates in val­id­at­ing a trans­ac­tion for the Uniswap pro­tocol, it’ll re­ceive UNI tokens in re­turn. Like­wise, if it does the same thing for an­oth­er pro­ject, say Chain­Link, then it gets LINK as a re­ward. Both UNI and LINK are fun­gible tokens — tokens which are in­ter­change­able with oth­er as­sets of a sim­il­ar type. Say, for in­stance, you’re hanging out with a friend at a res­taur­ant, you both have some din­ner and a few bevs, and the wait­ing staff wants to kick you out be­cause it’s clos­ing time so they subtly hint at you by com­ing over with the card ma­chine. To make things sim­pler, you pay for the bill us­ing your card, but then straight after, you ping over a ‘split the bill’ re­quest on Monzo to your friend. Your friend could de­cide to trans­fer the money to you in one go — but they could equally de­cide to pay you in 2 sep­ar­ate pay­ments. The value of what they send to you to pay for their half of the bill doesn’t di­min­ish be­cause of the sep­ar­ate pay­ments. In fact, they could, in the­ory, pay you in 10 sep­ar­ate pay­ments and the value would still be the same. This is what we mean by fun­gib­il­ity.There is an­oth­er set of tokens how­ever, which don’t quite work in the same way: the non-fun­gible token or ‘NFTs’. These tokens de­rive their value from their unique­ness, or as they’re widely known by the main­stream press, their ca­pa­city to be­come a sought-after col­lect­ible — think Faber­gé egg; think Poké­mon cards; think old school com­ic book col­lect­ibles… but di­git­al. You can’t split these as­sets in­to dif­fer­ent parts, nor can you ex­change it for an­oth­er type of as­set. If you did, it just wouldn’t have the same value. It would be like claim­ing that the pristine 1938 Ac­tion Com­ics №1 copy that sold in 2014 for $3.2mil­lion is the same as a non-pristine copy, or is the same as a copy of Ac­tion Com­ics №2… just, no.Col­lect­ibles can be fun, ex­cit­ing, and own­ing a rare item on a very ba­sic level, does things to hu­man psy­cho­logy. But there are oth­er use cases for NFTs too, which is ex­plored be­low — don’t worry though, as we’ll briefly touch on some oth­er fun ex­amples in the col­lect­ibles space too. Ap­plic­a­tions Non-col­lect­ible use case­s­Cer­ti­fied Doc­u­ments. Cer­ti­fic­ates can be faked, and some­times they’re so good that you can’t even tell they’re coun­ter­feit. Up­load­ing cer­ti­fic­a­tion de­tails on the block­chain and check­ing the NFT dis­trib­uted against that in­form­a­tion is a great way to en­sure a cer­ti­fic­ate’s eli­gib­il­ity.Sports. Sim­il­ar to cer­ti­fic­ates, fraud­u­lent sports tick­et sales have been an is­sue for some time. Tick­et sales by way of NFTs helps to make sure that fans are get­ting genu­ine tick­ets, which they can veri­fy on the block­chain. Ad­di­tion­ally, there are also col­lect­ible use cases for sports from di­git­al col­lect­ibles to NFT-backed sports fantasy games.Loy­alty Points. The concept of re­ward tokens isn’t new — Mc­Don­ald’s, for in­stance, gives you a loy­alty card for hot drinks. 6 stick­ers on your loy­alty card and you can go get your­self a hot drink on the house. These cards can be eas­ily mis­placed though. The loy­alty points NFT use case isn’t par­tic­u­larly look­ing to do any­thing nov­el — it just means that if your loy­alty points are dis­trib­uted by way of NFTs, you can’t mis­place your points be­cause it’s already on the block­chain, which you just can’t really lose.Art. And Memes. Do Memes count as art? A self-por­trait of Sophia the Ro­bot cre­ated in col­lab­or­a­tion with Itali­an artist An­drea Bon­aceto re­cently sold for nearly $700,000. Plus, the Overly At­tached Girl­friend meme re­cently sold for $411,000. Yup, you read both cor­rectly. A ro­bot and a meme. Lit­er­ally.Mu­sic. Lind­sey Lo­han re­cently partnered with Tron to re­lease her new single “Lul­laby” by auc­tion. Not long be­fore that, Kings of Le­on re­leased their al­bum “When You See Your­self” as NFTs. They re­leased three types: one which rep­res­ents a spe­cial al­bum pack­age, one which of­fers ad­vant­ages dur­ing live shows such as front-row seats, and an­oth­er which rep­res­ents ex­clus­ive au­di­ovisu­al art.Fine Wine. OpenSea, a mar­ket­place for di­git­al col­lect­ibles, has brought fine wine trad­ing to its plat­form. It al­lows par­ti­cipants to trade fine wine via NFTs and re­deem the phys­ic­al bottles at the end of each sale. In­tel­lec­tu­al Prop­erty When you buy a book, you do not ex­pect to own the copy­right in the lit­er­ary work which is between the cov­ers. All you have is the phys­ic­al copy and, un­der a copy­right concept called “ex­haus­tion”, you can sell that copy without any need to ob­tain the cre­at­or’s ap­prov­al.Even be­fore you move in­to the world of NFTs, buy­ing a piece of di­git­al con­tent is dif­fer­ent. What you are ac­tu­ally buy­ing is a li­cence to down­load/stream the con­tent and use it in the ways defined by the li­cence. So, I may be able to share e-books I buy with oth­er mem­bers of my fam­ily, if that is how the e-book sys­tem is con­figured but I can’t re-sell them once I have read them.So buy­ing an NFT is, in IP terms, like buy­ing any oth­er piece of di­git­al con­tent, in that my right to any copy­right ma­ter­i­al in the NFT is defined by the li­cence; the dif­fer­ence be­ing that with an NFT, the li­cence is also locked in­to the token and val­id­ated through the block­chain.From the per­spect­ive of the NFT cre­at­or, it is there­fore im­port­ant to en­sure that you own whatever you are pur­port­ing to grant a li­cence for. And own­er­ship of con­tent is not al­ways straight­for­ward — for ex­ample, take a mu­sic col­lect­ible NFT fea­tur­ing some art­work and a sound re­cord­ing. The art­work is likely owned by the cre­at­or of that art (or the per­son who com­mis­sioned it, if they drew up a suit­able con­tract). The sound re­cord­ing will typ­ic­ally be owned by the re­cord la­bel and the copy­right in the songs which are re­cor­ded for the sound re­cord­ing will be owned by the mu­sic pub­lish­ers (of­ten a song will have mul­tiple song­writers, each rep­res­en­ted by a dif­fer­ent pub­lish­er). So, in or­der to launch the NFT, you will need deals with all of these people, all of whom will want both a com­mer­cial be­ne­fit and they may also want to en­sure their cre­at­ive in­teg­rity is re­spec­ted.At the oth­er end of the spec­trum, there is no reas­on why an NFT could not be used to sell frac­tion­al own­er­ship of some IP rights — a form of se­cur­it­isa­tion, which will no doubt be ex­plored in the com­ing weeks and months. Fin­an­cial Reg­u­la­tion Al­though the reg­u­la­tion of crypto is very new, it was de­veloped be­fore the re­cent ex­plo­sion in pop­ular­ity of NFTs. As a res­ult, NFTs are not spe­cific­ally ad­dressed in the cur­rent laws or policies. However, this does not mean that they are not reg­u­lated. But it also does not mean that they are reg­u­lated. #Con­fused? You should be!The non-fun­gible char­ac­ter of a token will not af­fect its reg­u­lat­ory status. It is the oth­er char­ac­ter­ist­ics and func­tion of the token that will de­term­ine if and how it is reg­u­lated.If a token has char­ac­ter­ist­ics sim­il­ar to those of tra­di­tion­al se­cur­it­ies, like shares, deben­tures or units in a col­lect­ive in­vest­ment scheme, it will be con­sidered a “se­cur­ity token”. A token which func­tions as elec­tron­ic money will be con­sidered an “e-money token”. Busi­nesses con­duct­ing activ­it­ies con­nec­ted to these “reg­u­lated tokens”, such as is­sue, sale or mar­ket­ing, will be reg­u­lated by the Fin­an­cial Con­duct Au­thor­ity (FCA) in the same way as tra­di­tion­al fin­an­cial ser­vices pro­viders.If the token does not con­fer any rights on the own­er, oth­er than the abil­ity to hold, buy or sell, then it will be con­sidered an “ex­change token” and will not be reg­u­lated. If the token con­fers rights to ob­tain goods or ser­vices, in­clud­ing rights to oth­er tokens, it will be con­sidered a “util­ity token” and will not be reg­u­lated. If a token com­bines the char­ac­ter­ist­ics of an “ex­change token” and a “util­ity token”, it will also be un­reg­u­lated.Most com­mon crypto­cur­ren­cies, in­clud­ing BTC and ETH, are con­sidered to be ex­change and/or util­ity tokens and as such they are un­reg­u­lated.So where do NFTs fit in? The NFTs in the use cases dis­cussed above (col­lect­ibles and non-col­lect­ibles) will fall in­to the ex­change and/or util­ity token cat­egor­ies and so will be un­reg­u­lated. But in the­ory an NFT could have char­ac­ter­ist­ics sim­il­ar to those of tra­di­tion­al se­cur­it­ies, in which case it would be reg­u­lated as a se­cur­ity. It is very un­likely that an NFT could have the char­ac­ter­ist­ics of e-money, as fun­gib­il­ity is an es­sen­tial char­ac­ter­ist­ic of money. AML Reg­u­la­tion In gen­er­al, if a busi­ness provides the ser­vices of ex­change or cus­tody of crypto, it will be sub­ject to the Money Laun­der­ing Reg­u­la­tions (MLRs). Such a busi­ness must be re­gistered with the FCA, per­form KYC checks on its cus­tom­ers and mon­it­or their trans­ac­tions, along with oth­er AML re­quire­ments. “Ex­change” ap­pears to cov­er any busi­ness that sells cryp­tos to cus­tom­ers in re­turn for fi­at or crypto, in­clud­ing where the busi­ness also cre­ates or is­sues the crypto. “Cus­tody” in­cludes a busi­ness hold­ing crypto on be­half of cus­tom­ers or hold­ing their private keys. Busi­nesses that only provide un­hos­ted (non-cus­todi­al) wal­lets or soft­ware are not sub­ject to AML re­quire­ments.As with the fin­an­cial reg­u­la­tion dis­cussed above, NFTs are not ex­pli­citly in­cluded or ex­cluded from the MLRs. The defin­i­tion of “cryptoasset” in the MLRs is “a cryp­to­graph­ic­ally se­cured di­git­al rep­res­ent­a­tion of value or con­trac­tu­al rights that uses a form of dis­trib­uted ledger tech­no­logy and can be trans­ferred, stored or traded elec­tron­ic­ally”. An NFT could fit in­to this defin­i­tion or not, de­pend­ing on its char­ac­ter­ist­ics, and it ap­pears the de­term­in­ing factor would be wheth­er it is a “rep­res­ent­a­tion of value or con­trac­tu­al rights”. For ex­ample, a sports tick­et would rep­res­ent­a­tion of the con­trac­tu­al right to at­tend the event. A di­git­al art­work, like a meme, might not ne­ces­sar­ily rep­res­ent any value or con­trac­tu­al rights.However, a re­cent con­sulta­tion from HM Treas­ury on crypto reg­u­la­tion sug­gests that it views the MLRs defin­i­tion as in­clud­ing NFTs in prin­ciple. Hope­fully the po­s­i­tion will be cla­ri­fied by the reg­u­lat­ors soon. For now, wheth­er a par­tic­u­lar NFT is sub­ject to the MLRs will need to be de­term­ined on a case-by-case basis, look­ing at both the token it­self and the busi­ness that is provid­ing ex­change or cus­tody for it. NFTs and Emtech Trans­ac­tions Many fea­tures of Emtech trans­ac­tions that law­yers work on are fea­tures of NFTs. For ex­ample, NFTs:can be pro­gram­mable con­tracts (also known as smart con­tracts). They can be set up to deal neatly with the as­pir­a­tion of cre­at­ors to con­tin­ue to be­ne­fit from the com­mer­cial life of their work. For ex­ample, the token can have terms that will auto­mat­ic­ally pay a share of fu­ture sale pro­ceeds to the ori­gin­al cre­at­or. Leg­al takeaway — smart con­tracts are cap­able of giv­ing rise to bind­ing leg­al ob­lig­a­tions un­der Eng­lish (and oth­er jur­is­dic­tions’) law. But, they still need to sat­is­fy the tra­di­tion­al rules on form­a­tion of con­tracts (parties, en­ter­ing in­to a bar­gain, in­ten­ded to be en­force­able against them, with terms that are clear enough to an out­sider, and not of­fend­ing against any man­dat­ory rules of pub­lic policy). And, this re­quires some leg­al ana­lys­is of smart con­tracts (how they: split between nat­ur­al lan­guage and code, deal with mar­ket­ing rep­res­ent­a­tions, in­ter­act with laws on sale of goods, are in­ter­preted, are signed, deal with gov­ern­ing law and jur­is­dic­tion).over­come the ques­tion of rem­ed­ies and smart con­tracts. Pro­gram­mable con­tracts in­cor­por­ate the trans­fer of value. They there­fore don’t need to be “en­forced” in prac­tice through court ac­tion. Leg­al takeaway — rem­ed­ies for deals gone south will rely less on con­trac­tu­al dam­ages and more on rem­ed­ies from pre-con­tract deal­ings, torts, in­solv­ency rules and equity.can be used as col­lat­er­al. They there­fore ex­tend the mar­ket for al­tern­at­ive as­set lend­ing. There is a small but ex­pert group of lenders already provid­ing li­quid­ity against (il­li­quid) fine art as­sets. NFTs are prop­erty, they can se­cure loans and, if they trade more fre­quently than phys­ic­al fine art, valu­ations will be more pre­dict­able than in a mar­ket where few pieces are sold each year. Leg­al takeaway — tak­ing se­cur­ity in­terests over in­tan­gible di­git­al prop­erty is dif­fer­ent to tak­ing se­cur­ity in­terests over tan­gible phys­ic­al prop­erty so deal doc­u­ments need to be re­written­are an entry point to De­Fi. They can be traded and used as col­lat­er­al on De­Fi plat­forms and this will bring new par­ti­cipants rep­res­ent­ing dif­fer­ent in­terests to sit along­side those cur­rently deal­ing with fun­gible tokens on the plat­forms. Leg­al takeaway — this is likely to boost AML in De­Fi as the art world has been through a sim­il­ar pro­cess of en­sur­ing that reg­u­la­tions on source of wealth are fol­lowed. We cre­ated an NFT We jumped on the NFT band­wag­on and made an NFT out of this note on NFTs (chal­lenge: how many times can you get ‘NFT’ in­to one sen­tence…). You can take a look at it here: That-NFT-o… NFT for sale at Mint­able.app The NFT is a di­git­al rep­res­ent­a­tion of this note. What the pur­chaser gets is the ori­gin­al form doc­u­ment that this note came in. We should prob­ably also men­tion that there’s only one of these NFTs in ex­ist­ence, so once one per­son buys it, it’s gone! How to make NFTs (for non-tech­ies) Step 1: Check out your plat­form op­tions in terms of mint­ing your NFT. There are plenty of great ones out there like Rarible, Mint­able, Opensea and Found­a­tion. Step 2: For our NFT, we used Mint­able as our chosen plat­form, and we chose the ver­sion which is powered by our friends at Zil­li­qa. Here’s Zil­li­qa’s web­site too, for good meas­ure.Step 3: Cre­ate and list your NFT. Mint­able has a very easy to fol­low set-up, and it auto-gen­er­ates the NFT for you — no need to be a total tech­ie!Step 4: Re­lease an NFT about the fact you’ve just re­leased an NFT to pro­mote the fact that you’ve re­leased an NFT. #NFT­cep­tion­NB: We also worked with our oth­er friends in the space, NFT42 about how best to launch this pro­ject, and they gave us plenty of use­ful ad­vice. PSA This pro­ject was a col­lab­or­a­tion between CMS (Lon­don) and the Crypto Curry Club — a huge thanks to Erica Stan­ford for her valu­able in­put in this. If you’d like to get in touch with the team, you can con­tact us by send­ing an email to: [email protected] for CMS, or [email protected]­curry­c­lub.com to say hello to Erica.
06 April 2021
Court of Ap­peal sticks with CJEU jur­is­pru­dence on com­mu­nic­a­tion to the...
In its re­cent de­cision in Tun­eIn Inc v Warner Mu­sic UK Lim­ited and Sony Mu­sic En­ter­tain­ment UK Lim­ited [2021] EW­CA Civ 441, the Court of Ap­peal has re­jec­ted ar­gu­ments that the UK should de­part from the...
11 March 2021
The rising tide of plat­form reg­u­la­tion
Cov­id-19 has brought many things to the fore, not least the role that on­line plat­forms play in every­day life. However reg­u­la­tion has struggled to stay ahead of the curve due to the speed at which some...
26 January 2021
Me­dia Up­date Morn­ing Winter 2021: Con­tent dis­tri­bu­tion on­line - the new...
This ses­sion will fo­cus on key con­sid­er­a­tions for on­line plat­forms and those com­pan­ies dis­trib­ut­ing their con­tent on­line (or those keen to pro­tect the dis­tri­bu­tion of their con­tent). Reg­u­lat­ors in the...
27 October 2020
AVMS Up­date Part III – European Com­mis­sion guid­ance on video-shar­ing plat­forms
As per our pre­vi­ous up­dates, the European Com­mis­sion (the Com­mis­sion) has pub­lished two sets of non-bind­ing guidelines to help Mem­ber States im­ple­ment the re­vised Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia Ser­vices Dir­ect­ive...
27 October 2020
Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia Ser­vices Reg­u­la­tions 2020 Made
The Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia Ser­vices Reg­u­la­tions 2020 (“the Reg­u­la­tions”) have been made. The Reg­u­la­tions im­ple­ment the re­vised Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia Ser­vices Dir­ect­ive (as con­tained in Dir­ect­ive (EU) 2018/1808)...
05 August 2020
AVMS Up­date Part II – European Com­mis­sion guid­ance on the defin­i­tion of...
As per our re­cent up­date, the European Com­mis­sion (the Com­mis­sion) has pub­lished guidelines on the rules con­cern­ing the pro­mo­tion of European works on on-de­mand pro­viders in the re­vised Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia...
23 July 2020
The EU’s Di­git­al Copy­right Dir­ect­ive – Where now for the UK?
Back­ground The Di­git­al Copy­right Dir­ect­ive (the “Dir­ect­ive”) forms part of the EU’s Di­git­al Single Mar­ket pro­gramme of re­forms and came in­to force just over a year ago now on 6 June 2019. The UK...
21 July 2020
AVMS Up­date – European Com­mis­sion pub­lishes guid­ance on cal­cu­la­tion of...
The European Com­mis­sion (the Com­mis­sion) has provided two sets of non-bind­ing guidelines to help Mem­ber States im­ple­ment the re­vised Au­di­ovisu­al Me­dia Ser­vices Dir­ect­ive (AVMS Dir­ect­ive) in­to na­tion­al...
09 April 2020
COV­ID-19 and its im­pact on the com­mer­cial sec­tor
Force ma­jeure, ex­hib­it­or and or­gan­iser rights vis-à-vis can­celled live events and gov­ern­ment in­ter­ven­tion dur­ing the crisis. The COV­ID-19 pan­dem­ic and re­stric­tions im­posed by gov­ern­ments in Europe and...
27 March 2020
Law and reg­u­la­tion of force ma­jeure in Eng­land and Wales
1. Is there le­gis­la­tion on force ma­jeure in your law sys­tem? No. The term “force ma­jeure” has no re­cog­nised mean­ing in Eng­lish law and should there­fore only be used in agree­ments when it is prop­erly...
02 April 2020
Cov­id-19 (Coronavir­us) – Key Com­mer­cial Con­sid­er­a­tions
The CMS Com­mer­cial group re­cently held the we­bin­ar on Coronavir­us – Key Com­mer­cial Con­sid­er­a­tions. If you did not have a chance to at­tend, please find be­low the top 10 ac­tion points from the ses­sion...