In the context of developments in the field of financial technology, cryptocurrencies, emerging as a new asset class, have garnered significant attention in financial markets in recent years, attracting investors, researchers, and regulators, and leading to numerous publications. Bibliometric studies evaluate these publications based on criteria such as the number of publications, their quality, the countries of publication, authors, and journals. This study aims to perform a bibliometric analysis of the academic literature available in the Web of Science (WoS) database, focusing on the volatility of cryptocurrency prices. It analyzes the magnitude and development of academic interest in this field, along with key words, the most cited works, and research trends, in an effort to determine the density of studies, their impact areas, and the academic networks that have emerged in this field. Based on the general findings, it is observed that the number of studies has been on an increasing trend over the years, and that the publications are predominantly in the field of Business Economics. Moreover, it has been found that publications are mainly in finance journals. In terms of network maps, the findings suggest a moderate level of collaboration among authors, with the United Kingdom and the People's Republic of China occupying central positions in international collaboration. In terms of citations, authors such as Lucey, and Katsiampa, Paraskevi, have emerged as prominent figures in the fields of cryptocurrencies and volatility. Regarding key words, terms like 'cryptocurrency', 'cryptocurrencies', 'volatility', and 'bitcoin' are predominantly used in these studies." Keywords: cryptocurrencies, bitcoin, volatility, bibliometric analysis
The advent of decentralized cryptocurrencies has reignited fundamental debates in monetary economics about the nature and future of money. Proponents of digital currencies argue that decentralized, algorithmically governed assets can supplant central banks in managing monetary conditions and stabilizing economic outcomes. This chapter critically examines this proposition by evaluating cryptocurrencies against the classical functions of money and the core instruments of monetary policy. Grounded in monetary theory – from Friedman’s monetarism and Mises’ Austrian framework to Modern Monetary Theory – and extended through a behavioral finance lens, the analysis reveals that widespread belief in cryptocurrency as a viable monetary policy alternative is driven not merely by technological innovation but by deeply embedded cognitive biases, including overconfidence, narrative-driven speculation, and institutional distrust. The chapter also treats money as an economic asset subject to market competition. Drawing on Austrian economic theory and classical competition principles, the analysis evaluates whether decentralized currencies can realistically compete with sovereign money in an open monetary market. By integrating monetary economics with strategic competition frameworks, the chapter explores whether cryptocurrencies can achieve monetary dominance through efficiency, cost advantages, or differentiated value propositions. Based on principles from strategic business theories such as differentiation and cost-leadership, the chapter treats money as a competitive good subject to market dynamics, ultimately concluding that while cryptocurrencies represent a significant financial innovation, they fundamentally lack the institutional architecture and behavioral predictability required to replace central bank monetary policy.
A current, urgent problem is whether the price behavior pattern of significant quantities of digital assets reflects a single direction trend line or multiple phases that exhibit different structures, adjusted inter-asset relationship differences, and changes in management systems, given the growing importance of digital assets in investment portfolios and collateral holdings, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), new forms of financial activities, and system risks over the period from 2020 through 2025. Because of this period’s post-pandemic recovery, speculative overextension, sharp decline, stabilization, and the re-entry of large-scale institutions into practice, these changes in prices are more clearly identified under such a context. Empirically, this study integrates descriptive statistics, rolling volatility analysis, augmented Dickey–Fuller’s unit-root test, segmented trend regression model with structural breaks, and vector autoregression (VAR) for return interactions. Based on these bases, both Bitcoin and Ethereum have demonstrated a relatively strong direction of continuous appreciation, together with quite considerable regime-specific instability. The log-price series is non-stationary, but the daily return series is stationary; so a level model is appropriate for medium-term trend analysis, and returns-based models can be applied more flexibly at shorter timespans. The segmented trend-regression analysis shows that close to peaks, such as those that occurred in 2021 for a long period, the 2022 correction, and the resumption of investment in 2024, are relatively distinct from the overall linear change pattern across all time periods. Both Bitcoin and Ethereum display pronounced contemporaneous co-movement, but they show no substantial lags via VAR or Granger causality tests conducted in the context of time-varying parameters. This study employs an integrated empirical research approach based on various perspectives to explore the long-term structural adjustment and near-instantaneous cross-market relationship dynamics, as well as regulatory mechanisms within a systemic context.
The transformation of the copyright institution in the context of the intensive development of digital technologies and the globalization of the information space is studied. The legal nature of objects created with the help of artificial intelligence systems is analyzed, and the challenges facing the traditional anthropocentric model of authorship are identified. The features of non-fungible token technology (NFT) as a tool for monetizing digital art are identified
In the contemporary landscape of modernity, characterised by the evolving information age, cryptocurrencies have emerged as a decentralised mode of transaction, qualifying to be termed as liquid modernity (Bauman, 2012). The apparent fluidity, flexibility and the unrevealed potentially rigid tendencies inherent in cryptocurrencies; present it as a virgin domain to be researched with sociological perspectives. This paper aims to understand and outline the history of monetary systems starting from the ancient practice of barter to the establishment of national currencies, and up to the recent advent of cryptocurrency, in an evolutionary framework. As the second objective, this paper attempts to delineate the mechanism of construction and the causal explanations for the adoption and diffusion of cryptocurrency from a sociological lens. In view of the factual status of its legitimation and denial by different governing authorities, the third objective of this paper is to explore into the nuances pertaining to trust, governance and dynamics of power relations with a exploratory concern for rigidity within the claimed fluidity of the cryptocurrency and its utilisation. However, we are assuming one conclusion for our study and that is we are going to get stuck with more significant questions rather than the answers for our objectives.
Cryptocurrencies have become an important variable in the global financial system. With the maturity of blockchain technology, new applications such as stablecoins, Decentralized Finance (DeFi), Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) and Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization have emerged continuously, and the crypto-asset system has gradually formed a multi-layered and multi-functional complex structure. However, as the market scale expands, problems such as price volatility risks, systemic financial risks and illegal financial activities have become increasingly prominent, prompting the continuous evolution of regulatory policies in various countries. Especially after the concentrated outbreak of multiple industry risk incidents around 2022, the global regulatory attitude has been significantly tightened, and the regulatory framework has gradually evolved from fragmentation to systematization. At the same time, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) have entered an important stage of transition from experimental research to large-scale pilots, becoming one of the core paths for the digital transformation of national monetary systems. This paper systematically sorts out the evolutionary logic of cryptocurrencies, compares the changes in regulatory policies of major countries and regions, conducts an in-depth analysis of the development trends of CBDCs and the changes in the regulatory structure of crypto-assets based on the latest global practices from 2020 to 2026, and further explores the evolutionary direction of the asymmetric regulatory framework.
The rapid expansion of the digital financial assets (DFA) market in Russia offers new opportunities for market participants while simultaneously creating fresh challenges and risks of financial crimes. The author examines the economic and legal nature of digital rights within the context of Federal Law No. 259-FZ and assesses the effectiveness of current regulations. An analysis of recent judicial and market practices reveals specific predicate and direct risks to the anti-money laundering system, including “controlled defaults” by issuers, fraud, and the emergence of Ponzi schemes. The article also highlights the lack of standardized smart contracts in this market, which complicates the verification of distributed ledger algorithms. Current threats associated with the use of generative artificial intelligence for creating “money mules” and synthetic identity fraud are identified. Based on a comparison of Russian experience with the regulatory approaches of the USA and Thailand, the necessity of forming a proactive legal environment is justified. Recommendations include the need to align regulatory regimes for traditional and digital financial assets and to enhance the professional qualifications of the judiciary.
This study aims to examine how Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs), based on blockchain technology, are creating new digital cultural values in the field of photography in the era of digital transformation, as well as to analyze their legal regulation and practical applications. The research employs qualitative methodologies, including document analysis, comparative analysis, and case study approaches. Within the framework of Mongolia’s Law on Intellectual Property and Law on Virtual Asset Service Providers, the legal status of NFTs is examined, alongside an analysis of the operations of domestic platforms such as “Mongol NFT” and “Complex.” The findings reveal that NFTs technologically reconstruct the “digital aura” and uniqueness of photography, enabling what can be described as “digital permanence” whereby cultural heritage can be archived immutably. Legal analysis indicates that blockchain-based records have the potential to be recognized as “electronic evidence” within the Mongolian judicial system. However, a key challenge remains in the ambiguous distinction between ownership rights and copyright. Furthermore, the study identifies environmental concerns associated with the NFT minting process, estimating an average carbon footprint of approximately 20 kg of CO₂ per NFT, thereby highlighting ecological risks. While NFTs present new opportunities for photographers to protect and monetize their intellectual property, the study concludes that enhanced technological literacy, market stability, and more refined legal regulation are essential for sustainable development in this domain. Гэрэл зургийн NFT дижитал соёлын үнэт зүйлийн тээгч болох нь Энэхүү судалгааны ажил нь дижитал шилжилтийн эрин үед блокчэйн технологид суурилсан NFT (Non-Fungible Token) нь гэрэл зургийн салбарт хэрхэн дижитал соёлын шинэ үнэт зүйлийг бий болгож буйг тодорхойлох, түүний эрх зүйн зохицуулалт болон практик хэрэглээнд дүн шинжилгээ хийхийг зорьсон болно. Ингэхдээ чанарын судалгааны арга, баримт бичгийн шинжилгээ, харьцуулсан шинжилгээ болон кэйс шинжилгээний аргуудыг ашиглалаа. Монгол Улсын "Оюуны өмчийн тухай хууль", "Виртуал хөрөнгийн үйлчилгээ үзүүлэгчийн тухай хууль"-ийн хүрээнд NFT-ийн эрх зүйн статусыг шинжлэн, "Mongol NFT", "Complex" зэрэг дотоодын платформуудын үйл ажиллагаанд дүн шинжилгээ хийсэн. Судалгаагаар NFT нь гэрэл зургийн "дижитал аура" болон ховор шинж чанарыг технологийн аргаар нөхөн сэргээж, "дижитал мөнхлөл" (digital permanence) буюу соёлын өвийг өөрчлөгдөшгүйгээр архивлах боломжийг олгож байгааг тогтоов. Эрх зүйн дүн шинжилгээгээр блокчэйн дээрх бүртгэл нь Монгол Улсын шүүхийн шатанд "цахим нотлох баримт" болон үнэлэгдэх боломжтойг баталсан боловч өмчлөх эрх ба зохиогчийн эрхийн зааг ялгаа тодорхойгүй байгаа нь гол сорилт болж байна. Мөн NFT-ийг "mint" хийх үйл явц нь байгаль орчинд нүүрстөрөгчийн ул мөр үлдээж буйг (нэгж NFT тутамд дунджаар 20 кг ) тооцооллоор гаргаж, экологийн эрсдэлийг тодорхойлов. NFT нь гэрэл зурагчдын оюуны өмчийг хамгаалах, эдийн засгийн эргэлтэд оруулах шинэ гарц мөн боловч технологийн мэдлэг, зах зээлийн тогтвортой байдал болон эрх зүйн нарийвчилсан зохицуулалт зайлшгүй шаардлагатай байна. Түлхүүр үг: Блокчэйн технологи, Гэрэл зургийн архив, Дижитал өмчлөл, Ухаалаг гэрээ, Метаверс, Зохиогчийн эрх
The emergence of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) as a novel digital asset class has precipitated significant legal uncertainty across multiple jurisdictions. Unlike fungible cryptocurrencies, NFTs encode uniqueness and provenance on distributed ledger technology, yet existing legal frameworks — conceived for tangible property, intellectual creations, and financial instruments — have proven inadequate in determining their precise legal character. This article engages in a rigorous comparative legal analysis of the legal status of NFTs in Uzbekistan, the European Union, and the United States of America, examining how each jurisdiction has — or has failed to — accommodate NFTs within property law, intellectual property law, securities regulation, and consumer protection frameworks. A central concern of the article is the application of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms — including arbitration, mediation, and online dispute resolution (ODR) — to NFT-related conflicts. The article identifies critical lacunae in domestic and international legal frameworks and proposes concrete legislative reforms tailored to the Uzbek legal context, while drawing on best practices from comparator jurisdictions. The study concludes that regulatory clarity, combined with adaptable ADR infrastructure, is essential to foster a secure and equitable digital economy in the Republic of Uzbekistan and beyond.
The rapid expansion of cryptocurrency markets has fundamentally transformed the global financial system and challenged traditional approaches to financial regulation. Cryptocurrency exchanges have emerged as key intermediaries facilitating the purchase, sale, transfer, and storage of digital assets across jurisdictions. However, the borderless and decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies has generated significant legal concerns relating to anti-money laundering compliance, counter-terrorist financing measures, consumer protection, taxation, cybersecurity, market manipulation, and regulatory enforcement. This article examines international legal frameworks governing cryptocurrency exchanges, analyzes regulatory approaches adopted by leading jurisdictions, including the European Union and the United States, and evaluates major enforcement actions involving Binance and FTX. The study further explores emerging challenges associated with decentralized finance (DeFi) and proposes recommendations aimed at strengthening international cooperation and harmonizing legal standards for digital asset regulation.
NFT (Non-Fungible Token), son yıllarda kripto varlık ekosisteminde önemli bir dönüşüm yaratmış dijital varlıklardır. Dijital sanat eserlerinden koleksiyonluk eşyalara, oyun içi varlıklardan sanal gayrimenkullere kadar birçok alanda kullanılmakta olup, dijital içeriklerin özgünlük ve sahiplik niteliklerini kripto varlık biçiminde temsil etmektedir. Bu çalışmada NFT kavramı, tarihsel gelişimi, kullanım alanları ve türleriyle, NFT’lerin güvenilirliğini sağlayan Blokzincir, ikinci nesli Ethereum ile akıllı sözleşmeler gibi teknik yapısı üzerinde durularak hukuki niteliği konusunda değerlendirmeler yer almaktadır.
The article examines the economic essence of asset tokenization as a new form of microeconomic relations in the context of financial market digitalization. The existing approaches to interpreting the concept of "asset tokenization" in domestic and foreign scientific literature are generalized, and the author's definition of this economic category is proposed as an institutional-technological mechanism for digitalizing property rights that forms a new architecture of microeconomic relations among market participants. The existing approaches to the classification of tokenized assets are analyzed, in particular the regulatory approach of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the approach of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) based on the reference asset category. On the basis of their critical analysis, the author proposes a multidimensional classification of tokens according to six criteria: functional purpose, role in decentralized finance, method of collateralization, nature of issuance, fungibility, and jurisdictional characteristic. The microeconomic effects of asset tokenization are systematized, encompassing five interrelated groups: structural effects (fractionalization of property rights, disintermediation, formation of new market structures), transactional and price effects (reduction of transaction costs, improvement of asset liquidity), behavioral effects (transformation of incentives and decision-making patterns of economic agents), market equilibrium effects (expansion of supply and demand), and network effects (economies of scale, risks of market fragmentation). It is established that these effects are interconnected and collectively form a new microeconomic environment for the functioning of financial markets.
The evolution of the state’s role in digital finance from a passive observer to an active regulator and a full participant in the digital market has been studied. With the rapid tokenization of assets, the traditional financial system is facing unprecedented challenges caused by decentralization, anonymity of operations, large-scale regulatory arbitration, and the threat of laundering illegal income in the new digital environment. A comprehensive analysis of the digital financial instruments structure has been provided, and the potential of their impact on the global and national economies has been assessed. Particular attention has been paid to the risks of decentralized finance, including threats to monetary sovereignty and the challenges of using smart contracts. The paper examines the foreign and Russian experience of the crypto industry regulation, demonstrating a global trend away from strict prohibitions towards creating comprehensive legal regimes. The practical cases of various states have been analyzed, reflecting their strategies of adaptation to new digital technologies. The trend towards involving central banks in the digitalization process by developing their own digital currencies as a legitimate alternative to private crypto assets has been highlighted. It has been concluded that it is necessary to find a sound balance between stimulating technological in novation and ensuring national economic security
ABSTRACT TRSP Digital Coin (TDC) — The Next Evolution of Digital Currency: Quantum-Permanent, Physically Unbreakable, Theft-Proof by Physics Built on: Temporal Rotation Security Protocol (TRSP) v3, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20324081. First public documentation: May 2026. TDC is not a replacement for Bitcoin, Ethereum, or any existing digital currency. It is the next evolutionary step for the entire field — the first digital currency architecture whose security is grounded not in mathematical complexity but in physical law. Every existing digital currency rests on one assumption: that breaking the cryptographic protection requires more computational resources than any adversary possesses. Quantum computing is dismantling this assumption. Harvest-now-decrypt-later attacks mean every blockchain transaction recorded today remains permanently vulnerable to any future computational advance. TDC responds with a different premise: a signing key that no longer exists cannot be recovered by any computation, quantum or classical, regardless of future advances. TDC inherits the temporal rotation architecture of TRSP v3. Transaction signing keys rotate every 10–100 milliseconds from physical hardware entropy and are permanently destroyed after each rotation. CRATON-anchored ownership proof replaces persistent private key storage: ownership is demonstrated through a one-time physical commitment derived from the unique state of the signing device at transaction time — used once, permanently destroyed, impossible to forge, impossible to extract, impossible to replay. Three attack paths are structurally closed: private key extraction (no stored key exists), quantum key recovery (key destroyed before computation converges), and harvest-now-decrypt-later (signing key permanently gone — no target for any future computation). Part 9 (Identity Without Storage) documents a five-factor distributed identity architecture in which no single factor and no single location holds everything required to authorise a transaction: biometric presence; primary device CRATON anchor; memorised PIN with distress code variant; Remote Guardian Device in a separate geographic location; and time lock with geo-anchor. The distress PIN architecture triggers a silent alert and time-delayed freeze while providing apparent confirmation to an adversary — making the coercion attack structurally ineffective. Wallet recovery requires no seed phrase: a five-step multi-factor re-enrollment protocol using biometric presence, guardian confirmation, and a 72-hour cancellation window replaces the stored backup phrase that represents the primary theft surface of every existing wallet. Part 10 (Real Identity Enrollment) documents a biometric enrollment architecture that exceeds current KYC bank account standards: NFC chip reading of government-issued documents (cryptographic verification against issuing government public key — not photo or scan), live 3D facial biometric with active liveness detection, all-finger fingerprint enrollment, and a CRATON physical moment binding that ties the enrollment to the unique physical state of the enrollment device at that exact moment. Raw biometric data is deleted after enrollment — only a non-reversible binding token is retained. Identity is distributed across three separately held, individually insufficient components: Enrollment Authority, blockchain, and device. No single party holds all three. Legitimate financial privacy is preserved. The enrollment barrier is structurally higher than any existing digital currency. AML, KYC, GDPR, FATF Travel Rule, and sanctions compliance are structural properties, not regulatory overlays. Part 12 (Implementation Roadmap) documents a four-phase deployment pathway modelled on pharmaceutical clinical trial methodology. Phase 1 (Year 1–2): proof of concept with small high-security institutions — private banks, family offices, university research groups — using software-only TRSP daemon and TEE-based CRATON. Phase 2 (Year 2–4): institutional pilot with mid-size financial institutions and government treasury departments — dedicated CRATON hardware module, Remote Guardian architecture, orbital quorum activated above threshold. Phase 3 (Year 3–5): national pilot with CBDC programmes and full jurisdiction regulatory validation — complete five-factor identity, consumer enrollment refined at national scale. Phase 4 (Year 5–10): global rollout — CRATON chip standardisation licensable to semiconductor manufacturers, TLS 1.3 extension standardised through IETF, "Secured by TDC" certification programme. Each phase generates performance data that validates and de-risks the subsequent phase. The worst outcome at any phase is a parameter adjustment — no user loses funds, no system collapses. Part 13 (Digital Estate Architecture) addresses the inheritance problem that every existing digital currency has left unsolved: what happens to assets when the owner dies. Three mechanisms work together. Designated Heir Enrollment: heirs are biometrically pre-registered at wallet setup — enrolled but cryptographically inactive during the owner's lifetime, with no access to balance or transaction history. Death Verification Protocol: succession requires three simultaneous conditions — official government-issued death certificate verified by the Enrollment Authority, 2-of-N Remote Guardian confirmation, and a mandatory 90-day waiting period during which the owner can cancel with biometric presence. Dead Man's Switch: an optional owner-defined inactivity window that triggers Guardian alerts and initiates the succession protocol if neither owner nor Guardian responds within the alert window. For owners without designated heirs: charitable designation to enrolled organisations, institutional estate trustee, or deliberate coin retirement. Owner financial privacy is maintained completely during lifetime. Post-succession historical access is configurable by the owner at setup. Novel contribution NC-TDC-17 is placed on the public record as defensive prior art. Privacy architecture clarification: the default state of every TDC wallet is complete financial anonymity. Identity disclosure is exclusively owner-initiated — the owner may selectively disclose individual transactions for tax certification, charitable donation receipts, regulatory compliance, or proof of funds. No court order, no government authority, and no institution can access wallet identity or transaction history without the owner's willing biometric participation. The three-part distributed binding token architecture makes bypass technically impossible — not merely legally prohibited. This is not a policy decision. It is a physical property of the architecture enforced by the requirement for live owner biometric activation of the device component. Novel contributions NC-TDC-13 (Geographic Coercion Evidence Layer), NC-TDC-14 (Phased Validation Rollout Architecture), NC-TDC-15 (Owner-Controlled Selective Disclosure), NC-TDC-16 (Enrollment-Anchored Privacy Architecture), and NC-TDC-17 (Digital Estate Architecture) are hereby placed on the public record as defensive prior art. Novel contributions NC-TDC-1 through NC-TDC-17 are placed on the public record as defensive prior art: quantum-permanent transaction signing; CRATON-anchored ownership proof; Generation 4 digital currency architecture; five-factor distributed identity; distress PIN with silent alert; Remote Guardian Device architecture; seed-phrase-free recovery protocol; biometric-CRATON enrollment binding; privacy-preserving three-part identity distribution; AML/KYC compliance by architecture; tiered enrollment framework; orbital CRATON quorum for sovereign transfers. The architectural frameworks described in this concept represent technical design guidelines only and are not legal advice, regulatory guidance, or binding specifications. Actual implementation in any jurisdiction will require adaptation to applicable local law including inheritance law, data protection regulation, anti-money laundering legislation, and financial services licensing requirements. Version 2 introduces four formal additions. Mathematical Formalization (Part 6.1.5): the transaction pipeline is formally specified as a four-step ephemeral verification protocol — KDF ephemeral key generation from physical entropy (sk_eph, pk_eph) = KDF(E_phys); Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proof binding the ephemeral public key to the enrollment token without exposing persistent identity credentials; hardware-enforced destructive readout with thermodynamic irreversibility anchored in Landauer's Principle (ΔW ≥ n·k_B·T·ln2); and deterministic public-parameter-only ledger validation. Formal Threat Model (Part 4.5): three adversary classes formally defined — quantum network attacker (A_network, unbounded computational resources), malware/hardware attacker (A_local, full OS compromise), and coercion attacker (A_kinetic, physical duress) — with security proofs against each. Part 7b (AI-to-AI Micropayment Architecture, NC-TDC-21) documents the application of TDC quantum-permanent transaction signing to autonomous AI agent commerce. Every existing AI payment mechanism — static API keys, server-stored crypto wallets, centralised billing — represents a permanent credential attack surface vulnerable to quantum decryption. TDC coin eliminates this: each AI-to-AI transaction generates a CRATON commitment from the hardware entropy of the transacting inference node at that exact millisecond, used once to sign the micropayment and immediately destroyed. No stored credential on any server. Five new markets are documented: pay-per-inference settlement (USD 50B+ annual market), CRATON-anchored API key replacement, autonomous multi-agent revenue distribution at service delivery, AI training data micropayments for individual contributions, and cross-agent behavioural monitoring via the AI Guardian Layer at machine speed. The AI Guardian Layer (NC-TDC-19) monitors t
The article studies the role of finance control in elaborating the effective system of digital asset insurance. Special attention was paid to analyzing regulatory barriers hindering the development of crypto- currency and search for insurance solutions to minimize finance risks of digital economy. Key problems were analyzed, including fragmental nature of legal regulation, absence of unique standards in defining crypto-assets and poor coordination between national and international regulatory approaches. The focus was made on institutional problems, such as drawbacks in court practice, shortcomings in KYC/AML procedures and deficit of specialized compensation mechanisms for investors. On the basis of comparative analysis of regulatory practices in different countries the authors proposed ways to harmonize finance control, including elaboration of unique standards of digital asset insurance, working-out cross-border platforms to exchange information concerning cyber-incidents and introduction of ‘regulatory sandboxs’ to test innovation insurance products. The importance of adapting international recommendations FATF and IOSCO to specific features of decentralized finance systems was underlined. Practical significance of the research consists in advancing mechanisms, which can reduce legal uncertainty, strengthen confidence of investors and integrate crypto-insurance in the global finance infrastructure. Implementation of these steps can give an opportunity to raise sustainability of digital economy to cyber-risks and create conditions for developing insurance solutions of the new generation, such as parametric insurance and decentralized autonomous insurance organizations (DAIO).
Cryptocurrency has emerged as a transformative asset class, reshaping traditional investment and portfolio management strategies. This study explores the impact of cryptocurrencies on modern investment portfolios, highlighting their potential for diversification, risk management, and return optimization. The decentralized nature of digital assets, combined with blockchain technology, has introduced a new paradigm in financial markets. However, the high volatility of cryptocurrencies remains a significant challenge, affecting portfolio stability and investor confidence (Brière, Oosterlinck, & Szafarz, 2015). This research examines key factors influencing cryptocurrency investments, including market trends, risk exposure, regulatory developments, and institutional adoption. By utilizing statistical analysis and market data, the study evaluates the correlation between cryptocurrencies and traditional asset classes such as stocks, bonds, and commodities. The findings indicate that while cryptocurrencies can enhance portfolio diversification, they also exhibit greater price volatility than conventional financial assets (Corbet, Meegan, Larkin, Lucey, & Yarovaya, 2018). Additionally, the study investigates how institutional investors are integrating digital assets into their portfolios and examines the impact of regulatory policies on market stability. The results suggest that regulatory clarity significantly influences investor confidence and risk mitigation strategies (Auer & Claessens, 2020). Furthermore, Bitcoin’s role as an inflation hedge is analyzed, with evidence supporting its potential as a store of value during periods of economic uncertainty (Yermack, 2015). The study concludes that cryptocurrencies continue to represent an emerging yet highly uncertain asset class within modern portfolio management. While investors acknowledge the potential benefits of cryptocurrencies, including high return opportunities and portfolio diversification, significant concerns remain regarding market volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and long-term sustainability. The findings reveal that investors perceive cryptocurrencies as high-risk investments and remain cautious about their consistent performance compared to traditional financial assets. The study further highlights that uncertainty surrounding global cryptocurrency regulations and market stability limits broader investor confidence and adoption. Although digital assets possess the potential to transform investment strategies through technological innovation and decentralized finance, investors continue to adopt a balanced and risk-conscious approach toward cryptocurrency investments. Therefore, effective regulatory frameworks, investor education, strategic asset allocation, and continuous monitoring of market developments are essential for the sustainable integration of cryptocurrencies into modern investment portfolios.
The article examines the essence of cryptocurrency as one of the key factors for the development of an innovative economy in the context of the digitalization of financial relations. The evolution of approaches to defining the concept of cryptocurrency is considered, the positions of international organizations are analyzed, and the author's interpretation of this category is proposed as a virtual currency that functions on the basis of cryptographic protection methods and is capable of performing the functions of a means of payment, a means of accumulation, and an object of property.Particular attention is paid to the comparative analysis of cryptocurrency and electronic money, as a result of which their common features and fundamental differences are determined, in particular the decentralized nature of cryptocurrencies, the absence of an emission center and financial intermediaries. The mechanisms of functioning of cryptocurrency transactions and the features of using blockchain technology are studied.The article systematizes the advantages and disadvantages of cryptocurrencies. The main advantages include a high level of data protection, impossibility of forgery, low transaction costs, and deflationary nature. At the same time, key risks have been identified, including high volatility, lack of proper legal regulation, and increased fraud threats.The current state of the crypto market has been analyzed, in particular the distribution of cryptocurrencies by capitalization level and the assessment of their risk and profitability. It has been established that the market is characterized by high capital concentration and the dependence between the level of risk and the potential return on assets.Special attention is given to unresolved issues in the field of cryptocurrency research, including the lack of a unified theoretical approach to defining its economic nature, the ambiguity of its legal status, and the challenges of integrating cryptocurrencies into the traditional financial system. The methodological basis of the study includes a systematic approach, a comparative analytical method, as well as methods of generalization and abstraction, which made it possible to comprehensively assess the role of cryptocurrencies in modern economic processes.The practical significance of the obtained results lies in the possibility of using them to improve approaches to the regulation of the cryptocurrency market, risk assessment, and the development of innovative financial instruments. It is substantiated that cryptocurrencies play an important role in the formation of an innovative economy, contributing to the development of new financial instruments, digital platforms, and decentralized models of economic interaction.
While the iteration of digital technology encourages mass creation, it also poses challenges to the protection of digital copyright, such as difficult rights confirmation, unfair distribution, and high costs of rights protection. Traditional governance technologies represented by DRM and cloud computing are poorly integrated with legal norms, while emerging blockchain smart contracts face high technical barriers and institutional adaptation difficulties. Based on this, the digital RMB smart contract, which is positioned as an "institutional technical tool", inherits the programmability advantage of blockchain smart contracts, has the dual endorsement of central bank technology and credit, and can also achieve wide reach through the operation of commercial banks. It is expected to bridge the gap between technology and ordinary users and solve the problem of the connection between technology and law. Based on the specific practice of the Yuan Guanjia module built into the digital RMB smart contract, the technology is expected to improve the traditional subscription model, guarantee the stepwise release of crowdfunding publishing, realize the "per-use settlement" of prepaid authorization, and build a return mechanism for the interruption of serialized works, thereby promoting the full-chain governance of digital copyright.
The rise of cryptocurrency has revolutionised value exchange and contractual execution in international trade. This article assesses whether existing legal and arbitral frameworks adequately ensure certainty, fairness, and enforceability in international cryptocurrency contracts. Employing doctrinal and comparative legal analysis, it examines the legal and regulatory framework of crypto-assets and smart contracts across jurisdictions in both the Global North (including the UK and the EU) and the Global Majority (such as India and Iran). Within some evaluations of regulatory approaches, such as UNIDROIT and MiCA, the research finds that while some jurisdictions in the Global North have made progress in establishing regulatory frameworks that recognise crypto-assets as property and promote the enforceability of smart contracts, they still face significant challenges. These obstacles are even more pronounced in Global Majority countries, where regulatory strategies tend to be prohibitive or fragmented. Decentralised innovations like Decentralised Finance (DeFi) and Decentralised Autonomous Organisations (DAOs) further complicate governance and cross-border recognition. The article also investigates the impact of international arbitration, particularly under the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law. The findings reveal that, while these instruments support cross-border enforcement, they face challenges inherent to cryptocurrency, including issues with arbitration agreements, pseudonymity, public policy objections, and the volatility of damages. Blockchain’s decentralised structure further complicates the determination of an arbitral seat. Although crypto arbitration platforms are emerging as an innovative potential, their lack of connection to national legal systems renders them largely unenforceable. Integrating digital currencies into domestic legal frameworks may mitigate these concerns; however, effectiveness hinges on global acceptance, which remains fragmented across jurisdictions. In conclusion, the findings submitted that, despite notable progress, considerable gaps remain in both legal and arbitral frameworks concerning cryptocurrency. The key recommendations are to harmonise international legal and arbitral frameworks, establish more explicit rules for blockchain evidence, enhance privacy protections, and adopt hybrid arbitration methods that combine decentralised approaches with established practices. These measures aim to strengthen regulatory cooperation and ensure stability in cross-border cryptocurrency transactions.
Cryptocurrency has developed into a modern form of digital investment, largely supported by rapid technological growth, wider internet access, and the strong presence of social media. Although it has gained significant popularity in recent years, many investors still do not fully understand how it works, the risks involved, or whether it can remain stable in the long run.This study explores how individuals view and understand cryptocurrency as an investment option. It examines their level of knowledge, main sources of information, perception of risk, expectations of returns, and the influence of demographic factors such as age, education, and income on their investment decisions. The research is based on primary data collected through a structured survey, which helped capture real experiences, opinions, and concerns of participants.The study also seeks to understand whether people treat cryptocurrency mainly as a short-term speculative opportunity or consider it a long-term investment alternative. The findings reveal that social media platforms and peer groups play a major role in shaping investment decisions. At the same time, investors remain concerned about price volatility and the lack of clear regulatory guidelines, which continue to create uncertainty in the market.Keywords: technological growth,cryptocurrency,speculative.
Relevance. Problem statement. The rapid development of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and the expansion of blockchain technologies within the digital economy and the broader process of financial digitalization complicate the application of traditional approaches to accounting and taxation of digital assets. The absence of clear criteria for interpreting the economic substance of DeFi and its implications for the recognition, measurement, and disclosure requirements of digital assets leads to heterogeneity in accounting practices, reduced comparability of financial reporting, and increased risks for auditors and investors. Consequently, there is a need to identify accounting-relevant characteristics of DeFi that can serve as a basis for accounting decisions regarding digital assets and for establishing a unified approach to their classification and measurement in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The purpose of the article is to provide a conceptual justification and structured generalization of the impact of DeFi and blockchain technologies on the methodology of accounting for digital assets through the identification of accounting-relevant characteristics that determine the specific features of their recognition, measurement, and disclosure in financial statements in accordance with IFRS, as well as their implications for the formation of tax liabilities within the DeFi environment. Methodology. The research objectives were addressed using general scientific and specialized methods, including analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, comparison, abstraction, and a systems approach, which ensured an appropriate level of substantiation of the proposed arguments and the formulation of well-grounded conclusions. Results. The findings indicate that the transactional transparency of blockchain is accompanied by new valuation risks that affect asset measurement and revenue recognition. Existing tax regulations often fail to account for the specific characteristics of the DeFi ecosystem. Accounting-relevant characteristics of DeFi have been systematized, demonstrating that their influence extends beyond the accounting treatment of digital assets to the specific features of the protocol-based financial architecture within which economic rights and obligations are executed through algorithmic mechanisms without a centralized counterparty. Their systemic impact on the application of control criteria, the determination of the existence of contractual rights to claims, the selection of measurement models, the identification of the timing of revenue and liability recognition, and the scope of risk disclosures under IFRS has been substantiated. The theoretical contribution of the results lies in shifting from a descriptive analysis of blockchain technology to a structured accounting interpretation of DeFi from the perspective of control, measurement, and risk management concepts. Practical significance. The identification of accounting-relevant characteristics of DeFi is essential for developing a systematic approach to accounting for digital assets in a decentralized environment, as the protocol-based ecosystem of DeFi fundamentally alters the nature of the emergence of rights and obligations as well as the accrual of income, directly affecting the application of IFRS requirements. Such an approach ensures conceptual consistency between technological innovations and the regulatory framework of accounting and enhances the quality of financial information under conditions of financial system digitalization. The practical significance of the study lies in establishing a basis for updating corporate accounting policies and developing tax instruments that promote transparency and reduce risks in the digital asset sector. Prospects for further research. Future research should focus on improving disclosure standards and developing algorithmic models for the automated identification of economic transactions and tax events based on on-chain data.
The convergence of artificial intelligence, blockchain, and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) has triggered a doctrinal crisis in copyright, contract, and evidence law across several major jurisdictions, including the United States, the European Union, and selected Asian legal systems. By 2025, over 70% of top NFT sales feature hybrid human–AI creations, yet most remain in legal and economic “gray zones” across jurisdictions. This article examines the challenge of partial AI authorship through a comparative analysis of U.S., EU, and Asian legal frameworks, revealing enduring gaps in originality doctrine, inconsistencies in the treatment of blockchain-based evidence, and contested approaches to smart contract enforceability and royalty mechanisms. Particular attention is given to the technical processes through which AI systems source, transform, and recombine data from public and private domains, raising unresolved questions of infringement, attribution, and authorship when copyrighted works are used without authorization. Drawing on originality doctrine, transformative use standards, and fair use principles, the analysis argues that legal protection should be confined to AI-assisted outputs that reflect meaningful human creative judgment and demonstrable transformation, rather than automated reproduction. Situating these doctrinal tensions within broader patterns of market volatility, regulatory arbitrage, and unequal access to justice. It concludes that adaptive, pluralist governance is essential to achieving legally coherent and socially sustainable outcomes in the digital creative economy.