Richard Widmann brings together legal, business, and technical experience, making him especially well-suited to Web3 disputes. He is the Global Head of Web3 Strategy at Google Cloud, founder of the litigation consulting firm Incite Consulting, a former litigator, and an adjunct professor of cryptocurrency law.
He has spent the last decade advising companies, founders, and lawyers on issues related to emerging technologies, including AI and cryptocurrencies. In his day-to-day, he oversees the product roadmap and business strategy for a Fortune 10 firm. As a former litigator and litigation consultant, Rich combines his understanding of emerging technology with his legal experience to develop compelling expert testimony and reports that help simplify technological concepts. Rich also serves as an independent board member and audit committee member for one of the largest exchanges in the world and teaches cryptocurrency law as an adjunct professor at University of Texas Austin School of Law and Northwestern Pritzker School of Law. Rich Widmann shares his perspective and experience in managing disputes in the evolving Web3 industry.
Q: Tell us about your professional background and how you became involved in Web3-related disputes, including matters involving blockchain, cryptocurrency, digital assets, or smart contracts.
I began my legal career as a litigator and regulatory attorney focused on complex white-collar investigations, including work that helped recover millions of dollars tied to the FIFA World Cup bribery schemes. But long before that I held several technology-focused roles and always had a passion for new technologies. My experiences navigating federal regulatory investigations and my technical abilities naturally led me to the cryptocurrency space around 2016. I began representing founders and startups within the early Ethereum ecosystem, guiding them through high-stakes regulatory engagements and complex litigation.
More recently, my work has transitioned from advocate to expert, where I often see first-ever legal disputes whose results hinge on the technical specifics of cryptocurrency and blockchain technology.
That experience gave me a clear appreciation for the significant education gap between founders building new technologies, on the one hand, and the lawyers charged with advocating for these new technologies, on the other.
Q: What types of Web3 disputes do you most often see in your work? How do they differ from more traditional commercial, financial, or technology disputes?
Many of the Web3-related disputes I see have evolved with time. Back in 2016, many of the engagements were related to cryptocurrency exchanges, cryptocurrency issuance and regulatory enforcement actions. As the space has matured, most conflicts now involve complex founder disputes, trade secrets issues, fraud or disputes over cryptocurrency ownership.
What sets Web3 disputes apart from traditional commercial litigation is the structural ambiguity of the parties involved, the open-source nature of the underlying technology, and the technical nature of the evidence. In traditional disputes, corporate structures and legal jurisdictions are relatively well-defined. In Web3, you are often dealing with borderless networks, pseudonymous actors, and decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs).
The evidentiary record is also different. Unlike disputes where a significant amount of transactional evidence is in the custody or control of a single party, Web3 disputes often involve transactions that occur on an open, decentralized ledger available to all parties. In many ways, blockchain transactions can create efficiencies from a discovery perspective by reducing concerns about evidence spoliation and authenticity. At the same time, litigators and arbitrators need some fluency in the basics of blockchains and blockchain analytics to interpret the evidence accurately.
Q: What trends are you seeing in Web3 disputes? What developments do you think will most shape the future of dispute resolution in this area?
Both fact-finders and litigants are generally becoming more sophisticated about the basics of certain cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin. Unlike several years ago, most people have heard of a cryptocurrency wallet and understand the basic mechanics. At the same time, we are seeing an increase in disputes and litigation over later-generation blockchains such as Ethereum, Solana, and Tron, which have different technical properties, including smart contracts and staking.
Many cryptocurrency companies are also early adopters of artificial intelligence. In some cases, AI agents equipped with cryptocurrency wallets can make purchases on behalf of end users. This raises novel questions of accountability between users, the AI models embedded in those agents and the companies that offer these products.