DLA Piper

DLA Piper has offices in over 40 countries, making it one of the widest-reaching options for multi-jurisdiction crypto licensing strategy. The firm is particularly valued for its ability to coordinate complex multi-country licensing from a single relationship partner — reducing the complexity of managing separate advisors in each jurisdiction.

DLA Piper's key differentiator is breadth — the firm covers corporate structuring, licensing, compliance, contract drafting, data privacy, and employment across 40+ countries from a single firm relationship. For exchanges, DeFi protocols, and infrastructure providers operating across multiple markets simultaneously, this avoids the coordination overhead of managing multiple advisory relationships.

Racheal Muldoon in London and Josh Ashley in Singapore are the firm's primary digital assets relationship partners for the UK/European and APAC markets respectively. DLA Piper's size means it has relevant specialists across most major jurisdictions, and the right entry point depends on the primary markets the business operates in.

DLA Piper can work with early-stage businesses, though its strength lies in multi-jurisdiction matters that justify the overhead of a global firm relationship. For purely domestic, early-stage legal questions, a specialist boutique may offer better value. Where DLA Piper adds clear value is when a project immediately needs legal coverage across multiple jurisdictions simultaneously.

DLA Piper's rates vary significantly by office and matter complexity — fees in London and Singapore tend to be lower than equivalent US BigLaw rates, while New York and US offices are priced comparably to other large US firms. The firm's global pricing means teams can sometimes structure work to use offices in lower-cost jurisdictions for specific tasks.

The firm covers multi-jurisdictional licensing, corporate structuring for Web3 businesses, token contract drafting, compliance programme design, fintech regulation, data privacy in blockchain contexts, and employment and token compensation matters. It is less focused on enforcement defence or highly specialised securities law than firms like Sullivan & Cromwell or Gibson Dunn.