The concept of NFTs is tightly associated with the arrival of Web 3.0 in the digital world. Despite the increased aspirations for this new technological phenomenon with promises of protection, new paths of economic exploitation, and innovation, the reality seems more complex. Under the blockchain ecosystem, it is evident that NFTs present a unique structure that is far from what the EU legislator could imagine during the drafting of the EU copyright law regime. This raises the central issue of how NFTs should be legally treated under EU copyright law. Specifically, which actions related to NFTs fall within the scope of the economic rights granted to authors? What distinguishes a lawful minting process from an act of copyright infringement? These questions are tightly associated with the context of digital artworks. However, the main obstacle remains the absence of a clear law regime and case-law regarding Art NFTs. Consequently, this fluidity creates ambiguities between the owners and the buyers for the ownership regime. The purpose of this article is to clear the blurry legal atmosphere related to the application of the EU copyright law to Art NFTs. More specifically, “How Art NFTs interact with copyright? Is there a level of protection that is ensured? In the event of a copyright infringement, who should be held liable? To answer these questions, the research will begin by examining the technological “personality” of NFTs, focusing on the key elements that ensure their functionality as unique tokens. After that, a legal analysis will follow concerning the interaction with the EU copyright regime whether they are eligible for copyright protection, and what economic rights are entailed during the creation of an NFT. Finally, the possible ownership scenarios will be presented and the cases of infringement in the governance of these digital assets.
Abstract The market for the sale of art-NFTs is a reality, but due to their diffuse legal nature, there are many doubts about this business model from a legal perspective. This raises uncertainties as to whether it is possible to recognise a property right over the NFT as a digital asset and an online distribution rights model, where the principle of exhaustion is recognised from the intellectual property law perspective.
M. Vinnik, Максим Полторацький, Olga Konnova, Наталія Олександрівна Кушнір · 5 authors
The widespread implementation of blockchain technologies fundamentally changes many processes in the socio-economic and cultural life of modern society. The high level of investment in the implementation of this technology, especially in the field of digital art, confirms the perspective and high interest of business in the further development of the blockchain. At the same time, the appearance of a large number of digital works of art and the possibility of electronic access to the latest developments actualize the issue of copyright protection and quick obtaining of intellectual property (IP) documentation. This issue is also important for teachers and educational institutions because it allows them to protect the results of their work, promote innovation and knowledge in the field. The use of non-fungible tokens is one of the most promising directions for the protection of intellectual property. The article analyzes the experience of implementing blockchain technologies in the process of obtaining intellectual property documents and patents, and copyright protection in general, and also considers systems and platforms designed for copyright protection. We present the model of authorship registration and obtaining IP documents based on blockchain technology. The user’s authorship will be represented in the form of a non-fungible token (NFT), which contains all information about this intellectual property and confirms the user's right to it. Each NFT is unique, allowing creators to present their creations in digital form with guaranteed proof of authorship. In addition, the article presents a fragment of the requirements for the tokenomics model and a diagram of the interaction of agents in the context of the functioning of tokenomics and the model as a whole. During the research, an NFT model was developed. It represents an intellectual property document certifying the authors’ rights to intellectual property objects. We implemented a smart contract that manages the creation and transfer of NFTs using the Cadence language on the Flow blockchain. In addition, the key functional requirements for the system were implemented, among them: registration of authors and experts (reviewers), adding keywords for the selection of experts (reviewers), searching for relevant experts by keywords, implementation of payment functions for reviewers for work performed.
This study examines the challenges related to the music industry's digital transformation and potential role of blockchain from the perspective of collective management organizations (CMOs). Building on desk research and primary data from semi-structured surveys conducted with C-level executives and managers, this empirical analysis identifies major projects, their state of development, and prospects for digital transformation based on blockchain in the music industry. The findings reveal that there are a limited number of blockchain projects led by and/or with the relevant participation of CMOs. However, most are just research projects, proofs of concept, or pilots, showing that blockchain is currently in an experimental phase of development on the periphery of the music industry's digital transformation. This is not very different from analysts' understanding of the current situation and perspectives on the mass adoption of blockchain in other industries. In summary, blockchain is neither at the core of the music industry's digital transformation nor a priority for CMOs leading this process from the perspective of intellectual property rights management. The limited quality of music metadata, sparsity of sound data sources, and absence of a common data governance framework among different stakeholders within the industry are the main impediments to transforming blockchain into a global solution with transformative potential. Overall, the results provide a snapshot of the current status and possible future trajectories of blockchain adoption as a paradigm for intellectual property rights exchange within the music industry.
This paper provides a critical examination of Music Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) within the context of the digital transformation of the music industry, focusing on the implications for equitable artist compensation. As digitalization reshapes consumption and revenue models, the advent of Music NFTs, predicated on blockchain technology, presents a nuanced paradigm for artist-fan interactions and compensation structures. Through an interdisciplinary methodology that integrates literature review and expert interviews, this study scrutinizes the operational mechanisms of Music NFTs, their potential to reconfigure the economics of music production, and the attendant legal and technical challenges. While Music NFTs proffer an innovative approach to direct artist revenue and engagement, this inquiry reveals a complex landscape fraught with legal ambiguities, technological hurdles, and market volatility. The findings underscore the dialectical relationship between the potential benefits of Music NFTs for artists and the prevailing challenges that circumscribe their efficacy.
Digital collectibles are a new concept in the cultural industry that is based on blockchain and non-fungible token (NFT) technology. The current state of digital collectibles in China shows a trend of rapid growth from nothing to something, from sporadic to messy, with imperfect related laws, regulations, and supporting systems. The copyright ownership risks and platform transaction risks of digital collectibles in China are prominent. This article focuses on the production and transaction processes of digital collectibles, aiming to clarify the attributes and boundaries of copyright ownership of digital collectibles in China, define platform responsibilities, reduce transaction risks, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of consumers.
Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) have introduced novel mechanisms to authenticate and trade digital art, fostering a vibrantand dynamic marketplace by leveraging blockchaintechnology. However, the rise of NFTs has also prompted a host of legaland ethical considerations that necessitate careful scrutiny. This research paper provides an in-depth exploration of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) as an emerging form of intellectual property that is transforming the digital art landscape.The paperbegins by elucidating the principles behind NFTs and their significance to digital art, elucidating how these tokens redefinetraditional notions of ownership. It scrutinizes the role of blockchain technology in protecting digital art and the distinctiveadvantages it provides, such as transparency and immutability.The paper then delves into the critical legal implications,particularly focusing on copyright issues and the evolving regulatory environment, highlighting the dichotomy between theownership of NFTs and the copyright of the underlying digital artwork. It conducts a comparative legislative analysis ofIndia, the USA, and the UK, indicating the urgent need for regulatory frameworks that can navigate the global anddecentralized nature of NFT transactions.The paper engages with ethical concerns, including environmental impact, economic inequality, and artist attribution,underscoring the necessity for balancing innovation with responsibility.Finally, it provides recommendations for regulatoryapproaches and discusses future implications, emphasizing the need for clarity, balance, and international cooperation inlegislation, alongside the importance of continuous dialogue and research. This paper lays the groundwork for furtherinvestigations into the fast-evolving world of NFTs and their wider societal impacts.
Objective : to answer the question whether the authors’ moral rights the in the digital environment correspond to their original purpose, and to determine the impact of the development of social networking platforms, artificial intelligence technologies and non-fungible tokens (NFT) on the transformed role and features of the protection of the author’s moral rights under modern conditions. Methods : the research is based on historical-legal, comparative-legal and formal-dogmatic methods. Legal institutions and legal practice on the issue of protection of the author’s moral rights are subjected to critical analysis. Results : the genesis and normative fixation of the author’s moral rights are investigated in historical retrospect. It is noted that at present the protection of these rights is insufficiently regulated at the international level, while national copyright law, for example, of continental European states, provides a sufficiently strong protection of the author’s moral rights; however, the effectiveness of the latter is weakening in the digital age. The paper analyzes the changing landscape of copyright relations caused by technological progress: in social networks, in the generation of works by artificial intelligence, and in the creation of digital works of art. The thesis is substantiated that the author’s moral rights are undesirable in the context of social platforms. The paper proposes solutions to the issues of authorship of works created by artificial intelligence, violation of author’s rights, and integrity in case of full or partial borrowing of a work to generate a new work by artificial intelligence. The role of NFT technologies in solving the problem of preserving the author’s moral rights is defined. Scientific novelty : the work fills a gap in research on the relationship between copyright and technological development. It identifies and evaluates the innovations in the purpose and content of the author’s moral rights, caused by the processes of digitalization, and attempts to solve the problem of the author’s rights compliance with technological progress. Practical significance : the obtained results may serve as a conceptual basis for further development and improvement of national legislation and international legal regulation in the field of copyright protection, transformation of the objectives, role and place of the author’s moral rights in the digital environment.
The objective of this article is to evaluate countries’ approaches to the taxation of crypto staking by testing the consistency of current domestic rules and guidance against the technological substance of the same phenomenon. After the outline of the economics of crypto staking, the author provides evidence of the debate in tax literature and the regulatory landscape across selected countries. Subsequently, the research explores the technology features of staking and its fundamental variables of legal characterization, income qualification, and timing and value of income recognition. This way, the interdisciplinary methodology aims to outline a model of taxation reflecting the technological substance of crypto staking and test it against the current tax framework at the domestic level. The results of the analysis process show that the approach to the taxation of staking rewards does not ensure consistency with the technological substance in all of the selected countries. National tax authorities rely more on policy considerations aimed at maximizing revenue collection when developing guidance in the field than on the idea of coherent tax treatment in accordance with the technological substance and the legal characterization of the different types of staking activities. Tax & Technology, Blockchain, Cryptocurrencies, Proof-of-stake, Staking rewards, Direct staking, Indirect staking, Legal characterization, Income qualification, Time of income recognition
Purpose This paper aims to investigate optimal anti-counterfeiting strategies for non-fungible token (NFT) platforms in decentralized digital marketplaces. Using a game-theoretic model, it analyzes how verification policies shape interactions among platforms, genuine creators, counterfeiters and consumers. Addressing a theoretical gap, the study models the incentives and trade-offs platforms face when deciding whether and how much to verify product authenticity. It evaluates the impact of these decisions on consumer surplus and creator welfare, providing insights for platform operators and regulators seeking to balance profitability, authenticity and stakeholder interests. Design/methodology/approach A game-theoretic model examines strategic interactions among NFT platforms, genuine creators, counterfeiters and consumers across varying verification levels. The model incorporates dual sales channels (authentic and dubious), platform commissions and consumer heterogeneity in quality preference. By solving for subgame perfect equilibria, the analysis reveals how verification intensity influences counterfeiter entry, pricing and welfare outcomes. Comparative statics and equilibrium analysis provide managerial implications. The framework highlights the trade-offs platforms face in balancing verification costs with consumer trust and marketplace efficiency. Findings The study reveals counterintuitive results. First, the relationship between verification intensity and counterfeiter entry is non-monotonic – moderate verification can increase counterfeit activity by softening price competition between the dual channels. Second, stronger verification may reduce consumer surplus as price increases outweigh trust benefits. Third, the optimal verification level depends on verification costs and commission structures. Moderate verification often emerges as optimal, while excessive verification can harm both consumers and genuine creators. Research limitations/implications This study contributes to the literature on digital platform governance and anti-counterfeiting by introducing a formal game-theoretic model tailored to decentralized NFT marketplaces. It advances understanding of how verification strategies influence market structure and welfare outcomes in environments with limited enforcement. The findings challenge conventional views that stronger verification always benefits consumers and sellers, revealing nuanced trade-offs in decentralized platforms. These insights provide a foundation for future research on optimal platform design and regulation in blockchain-enabled, trust-sensitive digital ecosystems. Practical implications This paper offers actionable guidance for NFT platform managers in designing effective anti-counterfeiting strategies. It reveals that moderate verification – rather than maximal enforcement – is often optimal, even without cost constraints, as excessive verification can unintentionally reduce consumer surplus and original creator welfare. The findings highlight the importance of aligning verification intensity with platform commission structures. Regulators are also advised to consider incentive-compatible policies that promote trust while preserving market participation. These insights support more balanced and efficient governance in decentralized digital marketplaces. Social implications This study highlights the broader societal impact of anti-counterfeiting strategies in decentralized digital economies. It shows that well-intentioned verification efforts may unintentionally harm consumers by increasing prices and limiting access to authentic digital goods. The findings call for a more nuanced understanding of how policy and platform design affect consumer welfare, creator livelihoods and digital trust. By emphasizing the trade-offs between authenticity and accessibility, the study informs policymakers and platform designers about the importance of inclusive, efficient verification mechanisms that protect stakeholders without stifling innovation or participation in the rapidly evolving NFT and blockchain ecosystems. Originality/value This study fills a theoretical gap by modeling decentralized NFT marketplaces with limited enforcement and uncertainty. It is among the first to analyze anti-counterfeiting strategies in this context, offering practical guidance for platform operators and regulators. The findings enrich digital platform governance literature by highlighting nuanced trade-offs in verification strategies.
Abstract The emergence of large language models (LLMs) has made it increasingly difficult to protect and enforce intellectual property (IP) rights in a digital landscape where content can be easily accessed and utilized without clear authorization. First, we explain why LLMs make it uniquely difficult to protect and enforce IP, creating a ‘tragedy of the commons.’ Second, drawing on theories of polycentric governance, we argue that non-fungible tokens (NFTs) could be effective tools for addressing the complexities of digital IP rights. Third, we provide an illustrative case study that shows how NFTs can facilitate dispute resolution of IP on the blockchain.
NFT makers are creating NFTs integrated with IP that are being purchased for exorbitant amounts. On the flip side, NFT purchasers are buying up NFTs for these high prices because they may think they are buying the underlying rights. This "Money for Nothing" problem - taking its name from the Dire Straits song - is what this paper terms as the "IP-NFT" Conundrum that explains the basic misunderstanding NFT consumers have about the IP rights (or lack thereof) they are acquiring when they acquire NFTs. Part I of this paper will focus on an overview of NFTs and the lack of IP rights associated with NFTs, or the “IP-NFT Conundrum”. This section will include a discussion of how NFTs are being defined with respect to a series of trademark cases, copyright law and patents, which is covered in other literature as well as forthcoming papers from the author. Part II will then outline the current marketplace of NFT trading platforms and the “Money for Nothing” problem that exists where a mismatch or imbalance is created between consumer understanding of what they are wanting to purchase from a NFT and what is actually really being purchased. Part III will finally discuss potential solutions to the “Money for Nothing” IP-NFT Conundrum problem – e.g., NFTs embedded with smart contracts that automatically embed IP rights upon sale, stronger educational initiatives involving NFTs, or the creation of platforms (or integration of rules and policies on existing platforms) that will facilitate the ideal transfer of IP rights for NFT transactions.
Farizah Mohamed Isa, Mardiah Hayati Abu Bakar, Sarah Munirah Abdullah, Mohd Shaufiq Abdul Latif
A Non-Fungible Token or an NFT is described as a digital certificate representing ownership of, or rights to a unique digital asset, where the ownership is recorded on a non-centralized blockchain (a digital ledger of transactions that is not owned by the state or authoritative bodies).Common examples of NFTs are usually digital art or artistic works, including photos, videos, audio files, and collectibles, and may extend to game items, tickets, and other digital assets.
Responding to the necessity of scarcity and uniqueness in the digital format, NFTs (Non-Fungible Tokens) have recently gained much attention in cultural industries, especially video games and the art market. Faced with the digital paradigm shift and the challenge of dematerialization, creators started to use NTFs in order to emulate the concept of rarity for displaying, promoting, and monetizing their works in digital environments. An NFT is a certificate of ownership implemented through encrypted metadata pointing to a unique copy of a digital file. Likewise, NFTs enable the tokenization of a large array of digital, or even physical, assets. For this reason, they are used to facilitate the digitalization of contents heavily dependent on copyright and scarcity. Non-Fungible Tokens represent an emerging reality of significant economic, social, and cultural importance, which also raises important legal issues especially concerning the very nature of the NFT, as property or license, and the usage of copyrighted contents or trademarks. Indeed, the most frequent legal issues with NFTs are related to the attribution and exploitation of the Intellectual Property (IP) rights of the underlying content or litigations about non-contractual matters (i.e., theft). Litigious cases affecting NFTs most often take on an international dimension due to the decentralized nature of the technology on which they are developed, distributed on servers hosted in a multitude of countries, as well as the business practices of trading platforms that connect users from all over the world. Consequently, the principles of Private International Law (PIL) are applied to solve legal conflicts. This study focuses on the resolution of litigations related to NFTs in the three countries leading the global art markets: the US, the UK, and China. The analysis focuses on the application of international private law in relation to recent jurisprudence concerning conflicts involving NFTs and artworks.
The art market seems exclusive to a limited circle of collectors due to information imbalances regarding artworks and their value. Often, one must turn to experts and auction houses to finalize a deal. In addition to artistic advice, legal consultations are also necessary, often due to third-party claims on the ownership of the artwork or cases of fraud. This article aims to explore the potential advantages of utilizing distributed ledger technology in the art market to verify and record transactions involving whole or parts of artworks, making them traceable and perhaps more easily purchasable.
In the ever-evolving digital landscape, Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) have emerged as a disruptive force, challenging the traditional paradigms of digital asset ownership and control. As Fortnow and Terry aptly highlight, NFTs seek to redefine the relationship between creatives, users, and digital artwork, a relationship historically dominated by powerful online intermediaries operating under the access model [1].The prevailing access model, underpinned by a blend of technological, legal, and market dynamics, has largely curtailed the ability of creators and individual internet users to exert meaningful control over digital assets. Instead, these assets are predominantly governed by centralized intermediaries, offering seemingly unlimited access. While this model boasts advantages, such as a robust rights management system ensuring IP security and user convenience [4], it is not without its criticisms. The most glaring concern for creators is the 'value gap' -the disparity between the value generated by intermediaries and the compensation received by content creators [3]. This concern was so profound that it catalysed significant reforms in the EU's digital platform regulations in the form of the DSM Directive and, most recently, the DSA Act [2].Centralized intermediaries, with their overarching influence, have not only skewed the value distribution but have also left users vulnerable. The tentative nature of access rights means users can be deprived of their digital assets without warning, rendering them powerless against potential misuse by these intermediaries [5].This special issue of the journal underscores the profound impact of NFTs on Intellectual Property law. We are privileged to feature contributions that delve deep into this relationship from diverse legal perspectives. Dr. Ioanna Lapatoura offers a compelling analysis of the intricate relationship between NFTs and trademark law, using the MetaBirkins case as a focal point. Daniel Becker and Aylton Gonçalves, on the other hand, explore the implications of NFTs within the Brazilian legal framework. However, the legal ramifications of NFTs extend beyond IP law. In that context, Matteo Alessandro challenges traditional notions of property in light of NFTs, while Marica Ciantar examines the transformative potential of NFTs and Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) in reshaping collective organizational governance. Prof. Dr.Yulia S. Kharitonova exploredlegal issues of decentralized services in the context of utility NFTs. J.-G. A. Hanneman researched DAOs and AI-based Smart Contracts. The darker aspects of NFT transactions are also addressed, with Ass Prof. Dr. Dimitrios Kafteranis, Dr. Huseyin Unozkan and Prof. Dr. Umut Turksen elucidating their alignment with financial crime regulations. Moreover, the discourse on NFTs in private law is expanded upon by Dr. Elena Tzoulia, who highlights their intersection with the secondary digital consumer protection acquis in the EU.This issue serves as a testament to the multifaceted legal challenges and opportunities presented by NFTs. Through the insightful contributions of our esteemed authors, we hope to foster a deeper understanding and stimulate further discourse on this pivotal topic.
In early 2023 a United States (US) court ruled that a crypto art collection named “Metabirkins”, depictingthe famous “Birkin” bag of Hermès, infringedtrademark rights. This ruling conferred Hermès the power to ban the commercial exploitation of Metabirkins by their designer, through a permanent injunction order. By the time that order was issued, however, several Metabirkins had already been sold to third parties. Taking this case as a point of reference, thispaper examinescrypto art transactions from the perspective of EU intellectual property (IP) and consumer protection law. First, it clarifies the conditions under which the purchasers and licensees of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) fall under the consumer concept. Then, it examines whether the critical facts would constitute a trademark infringement in the EU, and what would have been the impact of such an infringement on the rightful use of the NFTs by their right-holders. Finally, the paper discussesDirective 2019/770 in protectingconsumersand itsapplicability in the blockchain ecosystem.
The paper examines the concept of ownership and its potential application to digital assets, particularly Non-Fungible Tokens (“NFTs”). Technological advancements which allow the creation, storage, and sale of unique digital assets in a purely digital manner have raised many questions about the concept of ‘digital ownership’. However, the legal frameworks regulating the ownership, sale, and legal classification of digital assets have not evolved at the same paceas technology. This leads to legal uncertainty in the digital landscape, and weakened protection for the users of this technology, particularly in the European Union (“EU”). Although the concept of digital property has been discussed theoretically, practical recommendations for the implementation of this concept are still scarce. This paper discusses the concept of digital property after providing a contextual understanding of NFTs and the technology behind them. Finally, the author offersrecommendations for a harmonised EU-level framework for the legal classification of NFTs, and for the concept of digital property.
The digital revolution has launched myriad new technologies in the field of art and cultural heritage law, including digital art, NFTs (non-fungible tokens), artificial intelligence (AI)-generated art, virtual reality and reality augmentation, online viewing rooms and auctions, holograms, immersive experiences, and more. As a $67.8 billion industry, the art market is a global driver of innovation, international collaboration, and national economies, given its cross-border transactions. However, given the extremely rapid development of these new technologies, regulators have struggled to keep pace and implement legal measures that are fit for purpose in this field. Limited oversight has resulted in several claims that have the potential to change the legal landscape. For instance, claims over the theft/misappropriation of NFTs and the related fraud and money laundering that may ensue, as well as a recent class action copyright infringement suit against the creators of a popular AI algorithm and infringement claims over immersive installation and light technologies, demonstrate how new ways of thinking are required to assess cases involving digital property (distinguished from other types of non-tangible property). Moreover, the US Supreme Court has issued a landmark ruling on fair use within the copyright context, which will be relied upon in the future to determine whether (and to what extent) the appropriation of existing copyrighted material is permitted. This includes both the digital use of physical artworks and the use of born-digital works. Although jurisprudential decisions are made on a case-by-case basis, factual patterns involving online media, digital art, and related technologies could serve as guidance for legislators and other decision-makers when considering what limits should be imposed on Web 3.0. This article will focus on recent US-based claims and regulations and dovetail with existing art market regulations in this jurisdiction (e.g., anti-money-laundering statutes) to determine their impact on new technologies, whether directly or indirectly. Finally, the article highlights ongoing trends and preoccupations to provide an overview of the shifting legal landscape.
The non-fungible tokens trading of digital content works, as an emerging business model, has rapidly developed while also posing challenges to current copyright protection. The NFT infringement incidents in recent years have exposed many issues, such as lack of government regulation, imperfect copyright protection mechanisms, and illegal profits from service platforms. Considering the collusive behavior during the NFT minting process, this study uses evolutionary game theory to model a game composed of three populations: digital content creators; NFT service platforms; and government regulatory agencies. We derived and analyzed the replication dynamics of the game to determine the evolutionary stability strategy. In addition, combined with numerical simulations, we also analyzed the impact of individual factors on the stability of system evolution. This study identifies that the incentives and fines set by the government must be above a certain threshold in order for game results to develop toward an ideal equilibrium state, and the government can try to improve the efficiency of obtaining and updating market information and set dynamic punishment and reward mechanisms based on this. This study also found that excessive rewards are not conducive to the government fulfilling its own regulatory responsibilities. In this regard, the government can use information technology to reduce the cost of regulation, thereby partially offsetting the costs brought about by incentive mechanisms. In addition, the government can also enhance the governance participation of platforms and creators to improve the robustness of digital copyright protection by strengthening media construction and cultivating public copyright awareness. This study helps to understand the complex relationship between NFT service platforms, digital content creators, and government regulatory authorities and proves the practical meaning of countermeasures and suggestions for improving government digital copyright regulations.