#018: Paul Grewal - Cryptocurrency Chief Legal Officer, Tech Lawyer, Former Magistrate Judge

This transcript was generated by AI.

Paul Grewal [00:00:00]:

The fact of the matter is that in 21st century American, and I think this is true globally, legal training and legal acumen has never been more in demand. and the way that lawyers are taught in law schools to think, I think, has never been more valuable. And I think that if if any newer lawyer aspires to have a range of experiences. In many ways, this is a golden age. It's just you have to resist the fear that we all have that if we try something new, we may not be as good at it as we are at what we're currently doing.

Jonah Perlin [00:00:31]:

Welcome to How I lawyer a podcast where I talk to attorneys from throughout the profession about what they do, why they do it, and how they do it well. I'm your host, Jonah Perlin, A law professor in Washington D. C. Now let's get started. Hello and welcome back. I'm very excited to speak with today's guest, Paul Graywall. Paul's had a varied and fascinating career. In fact, many lawyers hope to find their dream career once. What makes Paul unique is that he seems to have found his dream career 4 or 5 different times. in a law firm in the federal judiciary and now in house. Currently, Paul serves as the chief legal officer and corporate secretary at Coinbase, the leading cryptocurrency exchange in the United States, where he and his team were recently responsible for overseeing the company's massively successful IPO. Before joining Coinbase in September 2020, Paul was the vice president and deputy general counsel at Facebook. And before that, he served as a magistrate judge on the Northern District of California. Before he joined the bench, He worked at several law firms as a litigator, including as a partner at Howie LLP. Early in Paul's legal career, he served as a law clerk both on the Northern District of Ohio and the Federal Circuit. Paul earned a degree in civil and environmental Engineering from MIT, Go Beavers, and the University of Chicago Law School. Go Phoenix. Welcome to the podcast. It's great to be here with you. So I wanna start by asking you about your current role. Could you just talk briefly about what Coinbase is and does for those who might not be familiar and what your role is as chief legal officer.

Paul Grewal [00:01:55]:

Yeah. Happy to do that. So in a nutshell, Coinbase is about powering the crypto economy. And what that means is that we are a a platform for purchasing, trading, selling crypto assets, the most popular of which is is Bitcoin, Ethereum is also now growing in popularity. but crypto assets of all types. And beyond just trading crypto assets and coins, we are also a place for retail customers and institutions to do all sorts of other things with crypto. Borrow, lend our our products that we're focused on going forward for example, and and we also provide custody services. So our aim, our goal is to be all things crypto to all people. We've just started on that journey, but we're pleased with our progress so far.

Jonah Perlin [00:02:40]:

Sure. And

Paul Grewal [00:02:42]:

I'm sure that means that the chief legal officer has a very large set of tasks that you're responsible for. Can you just talk us through on a daily basis what kind of legal issues and types of law you're you're working on? Yeah. One of the one of the really fun parts about my job is that the issues that I'm working on really is very different, not just day to day, but hour to hour. And in some cases, minute to minute, I have a wonderful team of lawyers and other professionals who help me manage, you know, everything from the governance issues that the company faces. Obviously, we have our share of litigation. We have a significant number of regulatory issues that are that are quite interesting being in the crypto business and a whole host of other legal topics, employment, and investigations, and, obviously, a massive set of compliance issues as well that managed to occupy all of our time.

Jonah Perlin [00:03:33]:

You say that you have a great team, and in researching for the interview, one of the things I was really impressed by was how consistently you talk about your team and talk about your team by name, and I guess I'm curious

Paul Grewal [00:03:43]:

how you manage that team and how you think about building that team and then being able to rely on. I feel very strongly, Jonah, that running a a a a legal department of of any size, certainly of the size of Coinbase is today, just it requires incredible talent across the board. And this is a team sport that we play, and that's why it's the metaphor that I I use most often. As a team, we have different role players, people who have different specialties in different subject matter areas. If you're a basketball fan, we have a a lot of 6 men and women. and others who can fill into different roles as needed. And my job fundamentally, I I at least as I conceive of it is to serve as either the general manager, in most cases, or on occasion, the head coach. Because while I can set certain directions and encourage my team to focus their their time and energy on certain topics. At the end of the day, it's the players who either win or lose the game. And that's how I think about how to how to run things. Yeah. I it's funny on Twitter. I think you said you're lucky to play Phil Jackson surrounded by Jordons, Pippens, and Rodmans. I love that. Absolutely. Love that metaphor. To be clear, I will I'm very confident I have Jordan's Pippens and Rodmans all around me. I'm not quite sure I'm Phil Jackson yet, but I'm gonna be a bit a bit modest on my part.

Jonah Perlin [00:04:56]:

Can you talk a little bit about what you think about when you're hiring people? I mean, that could be people who are relatively new, especially given that your industry is such a new industry. I think my students are always curious, like, how do I make myself stand out, especially when there's not a preordained path how do you think about that when you're doing hiring or or looking to expand your team? You know, the way I think about it in my current role is not much different from how I thought it, but when I was a student, when I was starting out in my career, I I was very much focused coming out of law school in

Paul Grewal [00:05:27]:

developing an expertise in an area that was new and cutting edge. One of the things that I think is really important for new lawyers is to focus on where the future is and where there may not be decades of expertise already in the profession. for me, in the mid nineties coming out of University of Chicago law school, that was intellectual property. There there were patent lawyers. at the time. But IP was really undergoing a fundamental transformation. And so I wanted to be in an area of law where the rules were being rewritten and where there wasn't decades of accumulated experience that was terribly relevant down the hall or around the corner. And I think in building my team today, I I very much know, look for people who have that same mindset that even if they aren't experts on crypto walking in the door, they have a a mentality that they can accumulate that, you know, that fertees in that knowledge quickly, and then be useful to people even more quickly because so many of the issues that we're wrestling with haven't been resolved. The reality is that any of the subject matter or substance that we learned today, certainly in my area of practice, becomes dated pretty quickly. And so, you know, the the skills that translate are the ones that I certainly tried to focus on earlier in my career. And it's that mindset that I look for now in hiring newer lawyers in my current role. The skills the the the classics never go out of style, the owner. Right? The ability to articulate an argument the ability to write succinctly and the ability to boil down a complex issue into simple digestible parts, those skills very much translate and serve no matter what the subject matter maybe.

Jonah Perlin [00:06:52]:

And one of the biggest things that people who wanna be on the cutting edge in the cryptocurrency space or just the crypto space a little more broadly Some of the questions that I've heard lawyers ask deal with money laundering and nefarious use of cryptocurrency. There's regulation of FinTech. tax issues, environmental impact. NFTs, which candidly, I still don't know what an NFT is. I was hoping to figure it out this morning, and I never got to it. Where do you think crypto or the blockchain or however you wanna define it in terms of the law is going. What are the next sort of couple of issues that if you were thinking, I wanna get started, but I wanna be ready 5 years from now or 2 years from now, what are the things you'd be thinking about? So one of the things that's really fun about crypto for a lawyer is that the set of cutting edge legal issues really cuts across a wide range of traditional subject matter. So, for example,

Paul Grewal [00:07:42]:

in crypto right now, a a very hot topic, a very important topic is What does it mean to be a security? Are certain assets that are being developed and and traded securities under the laws that govern that activity? And are the places where these assets are being traded, registered, or not? Those that's, for example, a a very, very important issue in crypto right now. there are issues regarding data privacy and what responsibility parties and counterparties to crypto transactions have to protect the privacy interests of the people involved. There are issues involving intellectual property. You mentioned NFTs just a minute ago. They are certainly having their moment right now, and there are all sorts of very interesting questions about the rights that creators retain or should be able to retain as a result of the underlying blockchains, the power NFT. So I I think that the most important thing that a new lawyer an aspiring lawyer can do if they're interested in crypto as an area of practice is, step number 1, appreciate that you will not be focused on any one particular area for very long if you get into this type of work. And number 2, to develop a fundamental understanding of technologies, at the same time as you grow your understanding of the legal topics because the technologies will endure at least for a time. The legal issues will constantly And I guess on that technology point, should lawyers be looking to become more, not just technologically savvy, taking computer science, and taking patent law learning how to code, learning how to no code. What are your thoughts on that? It's less important to have a deep grounding in any particular tech area and much more important for a new lawyer or or a student looking to get into law to have a natural curiosity about these things. You mentioned patent law. One of my one of my pet Heaves is that in order to practice before the United States patent and trademark office, in general, there are certain exceptions. You have to have a a technical undergrad degree. Now I happen to have had 1. I studied engineering in college, so I'm probably speaking against myself interest. The reality is that the smartest IP lawyers and patent lawyers I've ever worked with, in many cases, had no specific technical training. What they had though was that curiosity, that insatiable

Jonah Perlin [00:09:44]:

desire and need to understand how things worked. And I think that actually is as important or more important than any particular technical background. I'll always like to dig deep with people how you learn a new subject. Do you have any tips or tricks about how you get up to speed on something brand new?

Paul Grewal [00:10:00]:

So when I joined Coinbase at the end of the summer last year in 2020, I had very little understanding of how crypto worked. And so I confronted this very challenge that you're identifying. My approach on day 1 and even before day 1 was the same as my approach when I was at Facebook before, when I was on the bench, and I confronted in an area of the law, and frankly, my approach going back to law school, which was to start with the 1st principles and fundamental principles the area of either law or technology involved. And to read and to reread, I'm not above getting on YouTube and searching for a a good Khan Academy video or another video that might teach me how something works. And then the other thing I I I try to do a lot, Jonah, that I don't know that everybody does, it talk to people because I find through conversation, you you have an ability to test your understanding of a subject matter in a isn't true if you're just sitting in the library in a chair reading a book. Yeah. It's it's the classic view for anybody who's unfamiliar with the Feiman technique.

Jonah Perlin [00:11:00]:

You don't actually understand something until you can explain it to somebody else.

Paul Grewal [00:11:04]:

Absolutely right. And and I think that the most important to also keep in mind is you're trying to explain or or develop an understanding over the complex subject matters that it's very rare that you get these things the first time. At least it is for me. They have to get very comfortable I've had to learn this lesson painfully over 25 years of practicing that the first, second, and third time may not be that when you actually understand how a particularly patented tech how particular patented technology works or the Delaware corporate rules that apply to warrants when you're talking about crypto assets, for example. This stuff is hard. it's okay not to get it the first time or even the second or third.

Jonah Perlin [00:11:40]:

Yeah. I think that's so important too. I mean, lawyers, I think we kind of there's this element of fake it till you make it, and we're supposed to know everything before we started. And there's there's positives to that. Right? I think you don't always you don't always need to have textbook knowledge you feel like you might just get by as a lawyer. But what I hear you saying is just keep learning it and digging one layer deeper, and that'll set you on a good path. That's not right. Yeah. You're right. You're right, Jonah. We we're not very good at teaching humility in in in law, are we? I'm and I'm reminded of my very first day on the bench in the northern California.

Paul Grewal [00:12:13]:

And I came in as a IP litigator with 00 experience in criminal law, for example. And on that very 1st day, after I took the bench, I asked the federal prosecutor and the and the assistant federal public defender if I could join them in their office. for a chat. And, of course, one of the privileges you have as a judge is nobody ever says no, at least in most cases, is those kinds of requests. And so I walked down the street to both of their offices and brought my lunch in a brown bag. And I sat around the conference table for several hours in each office asking questions about federal criminal procedure just to understand things from people who actually knew what was doing, and and I wasn't ashamed of the fact that I was the judge, and I had no understanding of how an arraignment really out of work or what the key issues were in a detention hearing. But I found that I was able to learn much more effectively and efficiently by just admitting what I didn't know. You don't need to know everything. You just need to know who your first call is. That's -- Exactly. -- so huge. So Exactly right. I I'd love to to change gears and talk a lot a little bit about your time on the bench. And if you could talk through how you made that transition, what made you wanna do it, how'd you there and then a little bit about what a magistrate judge does. I think a lot of lawyers, even long practicing lawyers, don't really get it. So how did you get there? And what can you tell us about the job? So like a lot of former law clerks, I had it in my head that if someday I ever had the privilege or the chain to serve as a judge on some bench somewhere in some way, it would be something that I would enjoy, and that would find you're, you know, too hard to say no to. Public service is always important to me. It's and and I wanted to have some element of that in my career before it was all said and done. In my case, in 2010 as I was cranking along, like, a lot of, you know, law firm partners building my practice, growing my experience, and trying cases, an opportunity came up in the northern district of California. It's a serve as a magistrate judge in the in the courthouse, the federal courthouse here in Silicon Valley in in Downtown San Jose. And I was very fortunate and blessed that when I expressed my interest in that position, court agreed. Magistrate judges occupy a very interesting niche in the federal court system. we're we I still say we, by the way. So I apologize for that. They are not article 3 judges appointed by the president and concerned by the senate serving out for life. Instead, they are appointed by the district courts, which are comprised of article 3 judges, and they serve for fixed terms of 8 years. And they are really there to work alongside of the district judges in managing the dockets of the court and the day to day work of the court. And what appealed to me about the mandatory judge position, especially at that time, was a unique opportunity to expand my skill set, to, you know, learn new things, as I mentioned, criminal law, a a subject ID, nothing about before before becoming a judge. Civil rights cases, securities issues, all sorts of things beyond just the IP law that I knew reasonably well at that point really appealed to me. And then the other thing that appealed to me was the chance to work with people day in and day out that were much different from me and that had very different life experiences for me, jurors, Grewal services, officers, probation officers, criminal defense attorneys, victims, all all sorts of people from every corner of our community that I would never have had a chance to interact with as a as an IP litigator, and that appealed to me as well the chance to really build human connections with people that I may not be wouldn't have otherwise had the chance do. So that's what really drew me, and that ultimately proved to be my experience much more than I would have even dreamed of. And I I've had students ask about applying for clerkships internships with magistrate judges. And I think the fact that they're not article 3, the fact that they have this signifier before the name judge, sometimes people it turns people off. I always recommend that they should because I think it's a really cool experience. Are there particular benefits you think actually to getting experience with the magistrate if you can? Yeah. So I I I understand that. I I clerked for a district judge and a circuit judge, and so I understand how law students, especially your young lawyers think about the the hierarchy of the judiciary, the federal judiciary, especially. But I think whether it's state court judges or justices or US magistrate judges, they're just a range or bankruptcy judges. There are just a range of opportunities to clerk that I think too few students fully appreciate. And I think the the many ways, there are advantages to clerking for magistrate judges that that aren't that aren't available to those who have other types of clerkships. 1st and foremost, in many district courts, magistrate judges actually try a significant number of cases to verdict because with the consent of the parties, MJs are authorized to do that. I had more than my fair share of jury trials in my nearly 6 years on the bench, and that was an experience. I think my clerks enjoyed as much as I did. Madistry judges in many districts also do a fair amount of mediation, and that was a skill that I was very interested in developing. I think law clerks can get exposure to the negotiation and the process of mediation, if they clerk for a magistrate judge, in a way that could be extraordinarily help to them as they enter private practice or any kind of practice afterwards. And then the other thing I think that a clerkship with magistrate judges really affords is you are really in in in many districts, if not most districts. The judge and and the court that the lawyers in the party see the most, in most cases, because you are managing discovery and pretrial case management. And the reality is that in a system where less than 2 or 3% of civil cases go to jury Grewal, and most cases get resolved even short of summary judgment on the civil side. You can see the the the the the actual working the day to day workings of a case from inside the court much more if you're clerical for a magistrate judge and for other types of judges. As extraordinary as those experiences can be as well.

Jonah Perlin [00:17:52]:

Yeah. And I was thinking about it when you were serving as a magistrate judge and in Silicon Valley, no less. And doing electronic discovery, I mean, that in and of itself was kind of a new a a new ball game for civil lawyers, but also for judges. I mean, that's such a challenge to take this system that we've basically had working for over a 100 years, maybe longer, and now we're throwing big data at it. What was that like? Oh, it's interesting. As a practicing lawyer, I I did not enjoy

Paul Grewal [00:18:23]:

discovery or, like, trying to discovery any more than anybody else, it can prove to be very challenging. Technically, the standards are very nebulous. And frankly, a lot of cases can bog down at that stage of the litigation in a way that can be very hard on the lawyers who have to manage it. As a judge, what I came to Discover very early on was that in so many ways, e discovery issues were were the were the issues where the law actually need more clarification, and there was more of an opportunity as it just to provide direction and explanation. Then, for example, the civil rights laws or the securities laws or whatever where there are 100 years in some cases precedent -- Okay. -- precedent to to rely upon. So I really embrace that opportunity I was not the first. There are a number of really outstanding, magistrate judges, and district judges who have written on e discovery topics. But I thought that was one area of the law where I can make some difference and hopefully provide at least a little bit of guidance in a way that I would have liked as a practicing lawyer.

Jonah Perlin [00:19:23]:

Sure. Sure. And it sounds like a great job. It sounds like you liked it a lot, but -- I loved it. -- eventually, you decided to to make up another pivot to use the Silicon Valley term. Tell me about that pivot to Facebook why you decided to do it and and what you did once you got there. For me serving it as a

Paul Grewal [00:19:40]:

federal magic agent was a career highlight. And I mentioned the opportunity to try cases, do a lot of mediation work, write a few opinions here and there. I loved being in that courthouse every day. And there's just I I cannot encourage young lawyers enough that there's nothing more exciting than being in a federal district courthouse day in and day I was having a wonderful experience and fully expected that I would be in that courthouse within one form or fashion for many decades to come. But in 2016, I I got a very interesting opportunity to join Facebook at a very interesting time in that company's history. when it was transitioning, I think, in a pretty profound way. Before 2016, in large part, there were exceptions, important exceptions, Facebook could do no wrong. It was a darling of of the tech industry and the darling of popular culture. And over the course of 2016, the cloud started to gather a bit. and the chance to to to to jump to Facebook and to apply a a lot of the lessons I'd learned on the bench in my previous life as a practicing lawyer to the regulatory and litigation challenges that company was about to face was really too hard to pass up. And so one of the things have not been afraid to do, as you've alluded to, Jonah, is make strange turns in my career where I thought there might be something I could do that would make a difference and also allow me to grow as a person in a lawyer. And once again, it threw caution to the wind and jumped in and got found myself in for a very interesting 4 years in that company's history.

Jonah Perlin [00:21:01]:

Sure. And and I'd love to ask a follow-up about what you did once you were there and what some of your memories are. But before we do that, one of the things that I'm trying to do with podcast by talking to people -- Sure. -- tons of walks of life is go back to 1st principles professionally about how you think about making that jump and how you weigh the

Paul Grewal [00:21:22]:

status quo. I mean, lawyers are pretty risk averse as a Grewal. And it takes a little it takes a little bit of a a leap of faith to make these jumps, and you've done a couple of them. Could you just talk through how you think about those transition or pivot points So I wanna be very honest with you, Jonah. When I walked away from my partnership at my firm and and then from my position on the bench, in in in the Northern California. I had more than a couple friends call me up and say, are you crazy? And they were right to do that because any sane person, I suppose, would question the leaving really privileged positions and and and positions that were not only satisfying, but just a ton of fun every day. I think for me, one of the things I I was very intent on, very early on my career was not falling prey to that mindset that too many lawyers I think have that really try to hold on to whatever success they've achieved, however small or modest, and not let go of it for fear, a failure, and some other new endeavor. I I just think that life is very short. And, you know, we in the middle of our careers, even certainly at the beginning of our careers, we lose sight of that because we assume that we're gonna live forever and that we have we'll have infinite opportunities to try new and different things. I also have have applied a pretty simple rubric or standard in evaluating whether to pursue a new opportunity in my career or not, and that is How do I feel about what I'm learning in my current position? What is my rate of growth personally, professionally when I'm doing today? And how how do I think that will compare to this new opportunity than considering. There are no guarantees, and I've made a number of missteps in in in, like, everybody else in in making these decisions. But I I I think that we tend to focus on what we have in front of us without considering how it compares to what we might have if we try something different. And it doesn't mean that you have to jump and bounce every 6 or 12 or 18 months it does mean that on occasion, I think it's useful to have a moment of reflection and and to ask yourself, am I doing everything that I wanna do when my career is said and done?

Jonah Perlin [00:23:15]:

Yeah. Do you think that's getting harder? And the reason I ask is we know we've we can see that the profession is becoming more and more siloed. It used to be if you went to a law firm, you got try a bunch of different things. Now you're in many places just turn into whatever department. Is it becoming harder to keep that generalist feeling alive as a practicing layer? I can understand why it feels that way for sure because the fact of the matter is that the the business of law, whether you're in private practice,

Paul Grewal [00:23:41]:

as I have been or whether you're even working in public service or public interest organizations, it's just much more specialized than it ever has been. Mhmm. That said, one of the things I hope that younger lawyers or newer lawyers rather keep in mind is that in many ways, there have never been more opportunities to apply legal training to new fields of endeavor, new industries, or new areas of of life. And my own career, I think, offers one example of that. The fact of the matter is that in 21st century American and I think this true globally, legal training and legal acumen has never been more in demand. And the way that lawyers are taught in law schools to think, I think, has never been more valuable. And I think that if if any newer lawyer aspires to have a range of experiences, in many ways, this is a golden age. It's just you have to resist the fear that we all have that if we try something new, we may not be as good at it as we are at what we're currently doing.

Jonah Perlin [00:24:42]:

Are there things you think you just as a current member of a law faculty, I appreciate the support for the legal education and legal training. That said, given your various stops along the way and what you do now, are there things you think that law school isn't doing that maybe we could do better?

Paul Grewal [00:24:59]:

I I think law schools are doing a lot of things right. I know that's not a popular sentiment right now, but, look, I I as I said, I think argument, logic, the ability to communicate. Those skills are have never been more valuable, and frankly, more in demand in private industry And I think that one of the things that I take a lot of pride in as a lawyer is in my ability and and the ability of my teammates and my colleagues to be able to reduce complex topics to digestible simple points. And that that basic fundamental skill that comes starting in SIFPRO and Torts in the in on the 1st day of of 1 l year and continues from there is something that's still extremely valuable. But you're asking what could law schools do better, and I wanna answer that. I think that the most important thing that law schools could improve upon is in considering what lawyers of the future really are going to need in order to be effective in in in in whatever organization they join, I think that In terms of training other your or or the next generation of legal academics, law schools to continue to do a very fine job, perhaps not surprisingly. I think it's also true that we still have an incredible wealth of talent in the courtroom in this country. And so I think that litigation is continues to be well served by by the legal academy, where I think perhaps there's an opportunity for improvement or just a greater appreciation is that the most effective lawyers in companies like Coinbase, for example, are the ones who understand the financial implications of the issues that they're resolving. They understand how products get built and shipped. They have some fundamental appreciation for that. They understand the limitations that are imposed by by broader cultural issues. So for example, as companies have been dealing with workforces that have been much more eager to have, for example, their companies speak to social issues. that are taking place in the wider community. Lawyers need to have that deeper appreciation. So I think it's a real challenge for for the academy, but I'm a long term optimist because I I I as I said, I I think that law schools have always been evolving. Maybe not as fast as some might like, but they've never been static places, and and I think that will continue. I'm with you. I too am a maybe a bit of a romantic about the legal education as being positive, but recognizing that we can do a lot better. And at Georgetown where I teach, I think we do a lot better than even I I was a student there 10 years earlier, and I think we're doing a better job training our students on some of those issues that you've talked about on communicating in other genres, not just the traditional memo and the brief and try to think broadly about what it means to be a writer in the legal workforce. I think that's exactly right. And I think if I can add one other one other suggestion, where I think there is still an opportunity, although I've seen great progress too, Jonah, even in the last 10 years. As it turns out today, it's my 25th law school reunion. So I'm in a very reflective mood. I'll be Congratulations. It's fantastic. Thank you. And I'm excited to attend virtually as soon as we're done here. But but I think that students also need to have a much deeper appreciation an ultimately understanding of the business of law. How do law firms operate? Where what is their model for success financially? How do partners get paid? What makes a young associate valuable to a practice group? At least a sensitivity, if not an understanding of of those issues, is also really important. for newer lawyers to have. And I think there's some room for improvement there. Yeah. It's and it's and I'll say it's the hardest thing to teach, particularly

Jonah Perlin [00:28:23]:

for academics who may have not practice for very long. There's a there's a a disassociation there that makes it a little more difficult. I don't wanna leave off Facebook, so I do wanna ask about Facebook. Sure. A Coinbase everything you've said sounds almost still startup y and entrepreneurial and getting new things off the ground in a world where you don't know what the big issue is gonna be 6 months from now. Facebook almost feels I know this sounds weird to say it, but almost like the old man in the group. What was it like to go to Facebook? How is it different than being outside counsel and then the judge and now in house counsel.

Paul Grewal [00:28:56]:

Yeah. When I joined Facebook in 2016, I think it was probably transitioning from the Upstart teenager into the adult and even old man or old woman of the industry. I I I it's interesting. There's still a ton of innovation happening at but I actually think, you know, in many ways, it is just starting on its innovation journey. I will say that when I joined in 2016, the company was still relatively small. I think they were roughly ten thousand people there. They're probably over 60,000 now working today. The legal department had maybe, I'm gonna guess, a 150 or maybe 200 people. At the time, it's now well over a 1000. So it was just a different scale to be than what it is today. But the issues were bleeding edge. Right? So whether it was data privacy, whether it was election integrity, whether it was teen mental health, obviously, a range of IP issues. It it felt like each and every day we were dealing with something that had never been dealt with before. and working on litigation and regulatory issues along with a very talented team over there, I felt my muscles were being were being exercised each and every day. And as exhausting as it frankly was, I will confess there were many moments when I felt like I was physically at the brink. I wouldn't have I wouldn't trade that experience for the world. It really was a a privilege to to work on those topics with with such incredible people.

Jonah Perlin [00:30:15]:

And how did your viewpoint change when you went in house. I've talked to a couple of folks who've gone in house from firms on the podcast, and I have a couple people coming up. But what were some of the differences and maybe things you wish you had own when you were outside counsel once you got the opportunity to be in house? It's a very different job working in house in any capacity the fact of the matter is that a lot of the things I used to think were super important when I was outside counsel to large technology firms

Paul Grewal [00:30:43]:

could not matter less to the people working inside those technology. companies. They're just they're very different roles that you play. When you're the outside lawyer drafting a brief to the 9th circuit or to the Federal Circuit, every footnote needs to be perfect. Every citation needs to be accurate. Every argument needs to be crafted exactly as it needs to be inside of the 14,000 word limit or whatever the case may be in order to succeed because the standards are high. Your competition, frankly, on the other side is often very high. and the judges are extraordinarily talented. It's sniffing out, you know, weakness to put it that's quite friendly. Totally. Inside of a company, all of that matters, of course in in terms of how it translates to a result. But how you communicate, for example, is very different. footnote perfection. I don't think I ever used a footnote at at Facebook, and I certainly haven't used one at Coinbase. My law clerks used to tease me because I used to just edit, reedit, and re reedit every opinion I wrote while I was a judge into the wee hours of the night. And the reality is now I'm mostly communicating with my colleagues inside the company over Slack or via text, and the form of the communication is very different. But I think the other thing that I I wish I would have appreciated more as an outside lawyer that I certainly have come to appreciate today is that the best way for an outside lawyer, whether you're a junior associate, or a senior partner to build long relationships that that are frankly satisfying and that and that are durable with clients inside of the inside of a large company. is to make your client look good. That's it's really that simple. How can you make the person that's entrusted you with their matter look good to their partners and their bosses. And and to worry less about getting direct credit from those end consumers of of of the legal service, Because in the in almost every case, at least in my career, what goes around comes around, and and where I've been most generous I I've ultimately enjoyed the greatest reward, and where I've been perhaps more selfish about wanting to get credit for winning this motion or this executing this perfect cross examination. The fact of the matter is that I not only did my client a a disservice in that regard, but I'd ultimately did myself a disservice. So I've tried to learn from that.

Jonah Perlin [00:32:55]:

Yeah. I mean, you have far more experience than I do, but I do tell my students on day 1, your job right now is to learn how to make other people look good It's a client service business. Yeah. It's a client service business from the moment you step in as a 1 l. And that's true. Even in law school, I tell It's not we have grades. We have exams. I get that. That's you. But if you can make your fellow students appreciate you and make them look better,

Paul Grewal [00:33:23]:

that makes you a better lawyer and creates a network for the future. It also makes you a better Perlin. Yeah. On top of that, we sometimes, we percent. Right? We lose sight of this that these jobs and careers that we invest so much in. And I've certainly, you know, done my fair share. are ultimately just means to an end. They really are. And I think that I only wish I had appreciated that more when I was at, you know, a very early the very earliest stages of my career, better late than never. And I think that to give to get a lot of credit to the law students today, I feel like they are more sensitive to that. than than maybe we were 25 years ago?

Jonah Perlin [00:33:57]:

I can't let you off on the question of how do lawyers write in Slack and on text message because this is one of my personal interests is how we take the 15 page memo, which I teach in my legal writing class, but also teach our students how to craft advice in bullet points and in PowerPoint and on Slack. Any concrete suggestions about how to convey legal analysis in these more. I don't like the word informal, but I'll use it informal means.

Paul Grewal [00:34:26]:

Well, whether you're talking to another lawyer or you're talking to a non lawyer, in these in in these informal tools that we've developed. I think a couple of things are useful to keep in mind. One is if you crank out a a message that's 250 characters, cut it down to a 150 characters. If it's a 100 characters, cut it to 50. You cannot be too brief. The other thing I would say is that these more informal channels actually allow you a way to express emotion or sentiment I think in ways that is superior to a 14,000 word appellate brief. And so I think it's important to take advantage of that. I'll throw an emoji in there every now and then when I'm talking to my team. I I'm not above responding with a GIF or GIF depending on your preferred pronunciation. And in a lot of ways, those alternative expressions are more useful to the person on the other side. And so you just wanna be thinking about that. as you're crafting whatever message you're you're trying to you're trying to craft.

Jonah Perlin [00:35:23]:

Right. Maybe try to sound a little bit less like a lawyer and a little bit more like a normal person.

Paul Grewal [00:35:28]:

Totally. And and I again, I felt pray to this as well. Like, no nobody, especially nonlawyers, but even your in house clients who themselves are are often very experienced lawyers,

Jonah Perlin [00:35:38]:

nobody is impressed by the lawyer sounding like a lawyer. They are actually much more impressed in my experience by by by lawyer who are practical, succinct, and sound like a normal person chatting with a friend. So that's something else I think to keep in mind. I'm gonna I'm gonna add that to my one of my slides for next semester. That's awesome. So before I let you go, I was gonna ask a little bit about where you think the profession's going. I know on Twitter, you've almost led the charge of late on the remote lawyer in the remote office and what that might mean for especially for litigators in terms of hearings and trials and everything else. But for in house, I know Coinbase, I think, doesn't even have a headquarters

Paul Grewal [00:36:16]:

per se anymore. Can you talk a little bit about how that's changing and and what that's a good thing or not or how you think that's going to change what we do every day as layers. Yeah. Joan, I I I don't claim to have any particular wisdom on this, but what one of the things your listeners can't see, obviously, this being a podcast is that I'm speaking with you from my backyard here in Sunny, California. And the remote work has some advantages to be sure. The flexibility, the ability to manage family responsibilities or just personal responsibilities more more effectively, those sorts of things, I think, are boons. And I think law has benefited from that in a way that very few other professions have. I will say this. The remote forced lifestyle for practicing lawyers, I think, is something that's here to stay. Whether we go back into the office a day a week or 2 2 days a week, whether we meet in person for occasional gatherings, that sort of thing. The reality is we're gonna we're all gonna be practicing law this way in some form or fashion looking ahead. I actually think it's a it's a godsend. I grew up as a lawyer who got on a plane to go to every meeting, every deposition, every court argument, whether it was for 3 weeks or whether it was for 3 minutes. I I'll never forget that at the time I flew to the Eastern District of New York from here in California for a 3 minute hearing because that was expectation of the judge. That was the expectation of my client. I don't think we're going back to those days entirely. Here's the other thing I know from talking to a number of my my my former colleagues who still serve on on the bench. The judges love it. By and large, there are exceptions to be sure, but the judges love the flexibility comes from this. So I I think we I think we are going to continue to enjoy the the flexibility that comes with this. Mhmm. The one thing I worry about, though, Jonah, more than anything, is the to which this comes at a significant cost for newer lawyers looking to learn from the senior lawyers who have many more years of experience. and have a lot of wisdom to impart. And I don't think we've solved that problem yet. I do think that that is a price that we are paying, and we're gonna have to figure it out or else our profession will have in the future. again, I'm optimistic about this. I think we can I didn't get to a place where we can take the benefits, at least most of them, preserve them, and then figure out other ways for a senior lawyer to share how to get to that perfect brief or now that that, you know, how to go through a security instrument make sure that everything is airtight or whatever the the project may be.

Jonah Perlin [00:38:33]:

Yeah. No. That I think I just I hear from my students. I just had a whole crop of students come back last summer. from doing summer associateship remotely, which even as somebody who was very recently in the traditional practice of law, their experiences were very different. And I think it's because We all are learning this new world, and we're learning the new expectations and how to create informal spaces. It's very easy to create a hearing online, it's a lot harder to create water cooler conversation, which I think is what you were getting at a little bit as well. I also think that senior lawyers have to accept the responsibility

Paul Grewal [00:39:06]:

that they have to make that make that work situation a success. The fact is that whether you're judge, whether you're a senior partner, whether you're a a general counsel. In many ways, life has never been better in terms of being able to practice law, where you want, when you how you want. This is a golden age for a lot of senior lawyers. I think that all of us who have practiced for 2 decades or more are responsibility to newer lawyers to make sure that they don't get left behind in this even as we're enjoying in many ways for the best times of our professional lives. Any concrete wisdom you'd give those senior lawyers to make that happen? Yeah. I I would say a couple things. One is it's important to see people as vaccinations take root and as offices open up. I think that's gonna be more of an option than it has been for the 12 months to be sure. I also think that more junior lawyers enjoy the the the direct connection they feel in a one on one conversation even if it is over video. It's a chance to show that we don't have this all figured out. Again, your listeners can't see this, but immediately to my left is a pile of unfinished laundry that's been sitting in there for 3 decades then. And I told you, I have kindergarten going on right below. Exactly. I and so we're all wrestling with these challenges. And I think to the extent that the technology can feel a little less personal, it it actually offers in many ways an opportunity to show more of realistic life then very few of us have this all figured out. And even if we look like we have it all down, very few of us do.

Jonah Perlin [00:40:27]:

Yeah. I love the way you pitch this an opportunity and not as just a sad substitute. because I've experienced that in my own teaching also. I had to miss being in the classroom and getting the energy from having everybody be able to, like, whisper the answer next to them and not have a whole screen of muted people. But I'll tell you, I think office hours this year on Zoom 1 on 1 were more success than in person office hours. People were more willing to come. I was able to throw a document up on the screen, and we could work together on it in a way that's very candidly awkward when you're, like, peering over somebody's laptop. And so you're right. Maybe there are some benefits too. I'll tell you one other example just from my world. Yeah. I managed a team of, I don't know, 100, 150 people at this point scattered all over the world doing a variety of things. Because of

Paul Grewal [00:41:12]:

our remote force work culture at Coinbase, we are interacting exclusively or nearly exclusively over video. What that means is that as the general counsel sitting on a call with vice presidents, directors, but also relatively junior people, someone who who may be only a few years out of college or a few years out of law school, On a Zoom screen, we are all equal. We command the same real estate as as everybody else, and I have found that the quality of the conversations I'm having with people who might not feel as comfortable speaking up and sharing what's on their mind has gone through the roof as a result of the technology. So I do think there are some advantages even as we have to work through some challenges.

Jonah Perlin [00:41:50]:

Amazing. Look. The last question I always ask my guess is if you have one piece of advice that you wish you had known when you were either starting law school or coming out of law school, what a piece of advice would that be? Coming out of law school, and I'm speaking very personally here, I was like a lot of students

Paul Grewal [00:42:05]:

in that my career, at that point, an academic career, had largely been a trajectory up and to the right with a series of accomplishments starting in high school, college, and then after law school clerkships and so forth. And and I would just encourage new lawyers or aspiring lawyers that that trajectory will not necessarily continue throughout your practice, and It's okay if you get rejected by that firm you really had your your heart set on. It's okay if that judge you wanted to clerk for decided to pick somebody else. Because in my experience, just as one door closes in the practice of law, another door invariably opens up, whether it's the next day or the next month or the next year, And as I look back on my career to the jobs I didn't get, in in almost every instance, a job that I enjoyed, and that frankly I was better suited for came along not long after that. And I just wish I had understood that that would be the case when I started up. And, you know, again, at at least I've at least I've managed to learn some part of that lesson some point in my career. So I suppose that that's a good thing.

Jonah Perlin [00:43:09]:

Again, that was Paul Graywall, chief legal officer at Coinbase. I'm so grateful that Paul volunteered to join me on the podcast for such an in-depth discussion on his many legal careers and more importantly, what lessons he learned along the way, and where he thinks the practice of law is going in the years to come. Paul's story really is a testament to the fact. that both professional and personal success in the law is not best measured by what you've done in the past or what experiences or even successes you've had. But rather, it is instead based on how you can translate those experiences to what you do next. I hope we'll be able to cover a Union episode someday because the conversation could have for several more hours. If you enjoyed this episode, I hope you'll consider subscribing at howilawyer.com or wherever you get your podcasts. And as always, I can be reached at howilawyer@gmail.com or at Jonah Perlin on Twitter if you have any suggestions or ideas for the show. Thanks again to Paul. Thanks for listening, and have a great week.