Look at your feet. Many of you (raising your hand) are wearing sneakers now. For the fiscal year ending May 31, 2021, Nike announced revenue growth of 19% to $ 44.5 billion for the year. But it’s here. What about Metaverse?

Why Nike is interested in Metaverse
For those who are not yet familiar with the concept, the simplest but imperfect way to visualize Metaverse is to imagine themselves in a real video game. Nike does some pretty cool descriptive things.

It’s not a joke. Nike takes Metaverse very seriously.

Patent applications covering the pre-Metaverse world in 2018 show that Nike has seriously stored gadgets that they could do business with in Metaverse. These digital tools will include sneakers, avatars and other forms of virtual branding. Sure, Nike intends to sell you digital products (and you want to buy them because Nike knows how to make you have them), but the narrative plan is all about digital worlds.

Is it just Nike? Of course, but if we decide to define it as creating new streams of net income, as it has been throughout history, that’s fine. Someone wants a Metaverse swag, and so can Nike.

Metaverse has new rules for Nike
Nike should be prepared for the concept of destruction by duality. In this transient world, Nike has had a lot of controversy lately about their intellectual property (IP) rights. However, the duality of Metaverset will go beyond our current understanding of what is legal. The cost of Nike’s meta tools will depend entirely on what the company considers pirates, while others may call artists.

In the real world, there is a contemporary art project called the Museum of Forgeries, which has important commercial uses. In short, the Brooklyn-based Mushf Art Group bought Warhol’s original work for $ 20,000 and made 999 exact counterfeits. She then mixed and sold all her “possibly real” Warhols for $ 1,000 to $ 250 apiece, for a total of $ 250,000, of which $ 230,000 was a profit.

Related topics: Digital transformation physically: The best NFT showrooms to visit in person in 2021

The same will happen in Metaverset. Some rare Nike drops (the sneaker addict calls a new version of the shoe, or even the color – known as the “color scheme” – of the shoe) will be genuine, some may be genuine, and some will be intentionally or unintentionally fake.

New metavers for ships
Regarding how the courts will ultimately deal with these insecure disputes, Miami attorney Samir Patel and a member of the Miami-Dade Crypto Task Force recently tweeted:

I talked to Patel about new facts in Metaversen and that it will be a quick and difficult conclusion when the judges realize that a common precedent will be more of an obstacle than an aid to resolving cases in Metaversen. As Patel said:

“Legal doctrine such as property rights, unjustified breach of contract and copyright infringement in man-made works will govern matters in Metaverse (MV).”
He continued: “So when Nike wants to get involved in MV, whether it’s virtual store fronts, avatar hardware or creating new products exclusively for MVs, their lawyers need to make a connection between MV’s breaches or claims and meat. Rom. ”

The very fact that several judges (and very few lawyers) have used or even heard the term “meat place” is a problem in itself. This term refers to our physical world, as opposed to cyberspace or virtual environments like Metaverse.

So yes, Metaverse’s claims to judges, at least originally written in such conventional ways, using such a traditional language, must be dropped so that judges do not get lost.

Can Nike help create a legal framework for Metaverse?
Patel sees a real opportunity here. “Nike has the resources to train judges during the trial because they can pay their lawyers to extend the trial, but it will be difficult for smaller applicants to convince a judge that they own virtual property that is on a virtual land register. A decentralized blockchain is maintained , “he said.

Patel explained to me that if he were to buy virtual land in Metaverse, the judge would probably see the transaction as a sale of goods, not a transfer of ownership. Since the legal provisions do not contain or recognize the idea of ​​virtual property, this virtual land can not be registered in the virtual property register because this register is not regulated by the municipality or the sovereign.

Source: CoinTelegraph