Title: Are NFT’s a bluffDead?: The Metaverse, Blockchain, and Art.

A. Time and location:

Monday May 22nd 19:00 Calle Velazquez 130 V HUB-2

B. Panel:

- Alvaro Bourkaib: Partner (IP,IT, Entertainment, Media) at Cuatrecasas

- Carlos Rivadula: Oliva Manager IP/IT at ECIJA

C. Frame:

The underlying question of this discussion isdiscussion is to assess if we can still extract
value from NFT’s or whether they were just a bubble that now is irrelevant.

Considering that probably the crowd will not only be law students but also students related
more to technology, business and humanities degrees so the conversation should consider
different aspects of NFTs and also maybe a simple level explanation

Here is the proposed structure we came up with. (Of course feel free to give me comments
or anything you would like to change or take out). We can talk through mail or even have a
call if you are free next week if there's anything you want to consider.

D. Phases of the event: Starts at 19:00

1. Panel: Talk between the 3 of us ( i will ask some questions as moderator to start off): the
idea would be 30 to 40 minutes
2. A Q&A: of 2-3 questions (10 mins)

I understand then if you have to leave or are busy don't worry you don’t need to stay but are more
than welcome to.

3. Networking: Showcasing a student’s initiative of the Metaverse where he placed the

paintings of university students. People can start having things from the small cocktail.

E. Content of the event: Starts at 19:00

This is of course a preliminary structure and I would like your inputs of things you
would like to cover additionally.
Or, if you think that certain things should be eliminated or modified also let me know.

The idea would be to mix a technological aspect of the functioning of NFT’s(1), with also
some (2) financial considerations of NFT in terms of what they are classified as
(utilities/securities) and (3) finally more of a legal approach concerning NFT’ and current
litigation with ip rights that can be explored with the Mango case.
 1. Introduction:
a. Short context.
b. How did they come to rise?
c. What are they? The underlying blockchain technology. Metadata and unique hash
characteristic

2. The Process of Minting an NFT:

a. Standard used (erc 721), use of smart contracts as code.
b. Marketplaces where NFT’s are transacted: are there different models of market
places?
c. What does the buyer of an NFT acquire?

3. Considerations concerning regulation of NFT’s:

a. Is it a crypto asset? Why did it not fall under MICA.
b. Difference between it being a security or a utility.
c. Where are we witnessing it more considered now towards its classification?
Difference between EU or US.

4. Licensing of NFTs for commercialization purposes and case study of MANGO case:
a. Regulation of IP rights concerning NFTs:
i. In the end it is solely through Terms and Conditions?
ii. For licences: Benefits of getting automated royalty payments?
b. Background of the MANGO case and verdict (there is no verdict yet, only a
preliminary decision which does not consideres (yet) the legal grounds).
c. Analysis of rights that were breached:
i. making available to the public rights? reproduction?
ii. Right of public exhibition can it be granted in the context of nfts and the
metaverse in Spain?
iii. Any particularities and future considerations (there was a previous
transformation (from paintings to clothing) involved before creating it into
NFTs?). Would this impact other future rulings?
Maybe it’s a little ambition considering the public, the time and the topics to be covered.
5. Conclusion :

Are NTfs for blockchain and crypto’s a failed use casean speculative bluff or is there potential
with their use and commercial exploitation?

Again this is a preliminary structure and maybe it considers too many aspects. Let me know what you
think and of course it is more based on your input that we would like to take into account. .

Mi repsuesta (DAVID) :
Hola!

Muchas gracias por los comentarios!

Lo de bluff al principio creo que no vamos a poder cambiar el título porque ya está
marqueteado de esta manera. Sí que podríamos ponerlo al hablar y sobre todo en la
conclusión como dices presentarlo como un bluff.

Si la explicación de blockchain esta bien. Vale, sí entiendo que no es un verdict en

realidad. De acuerdo con la parte de conclusión. y de derechos.

Es verdad ,siento que es ambicioso como dices pero al mismo tiempo quisiera que
la gente pueda identificarse con las diferentes partes.

¿Recomiendas quizás mantener las 3 partes pero recortar el contenido en cada

una ? (los subapartados).