Entre 1778 et 1788, les chanoinesses du chapitre noble de Remiremont font appel ร un cordelier, Claude Vuillemin, pour dresser lโinventaire de leurs archives. Vuillemin travaille non seulement ร cet inventaire, mais aussi au cartulaire du chapitre et prend lโinitiative de produire, en marge de ce travail, des Monuments, recueils de piรจces hรฉtรฉrogรจnes relatives ร lโhistoire du chapitre. Cet article se propose dโexaminer les modalitรฉs du travail de Vuillemin et leur conformitรฉ aux pratiques documentaires de son temps pour en dรฉterminer les enjeux. Si les derniรจres abbesses se sont montrรฉes aussi vigilantes dans la gestion des archives, cโest que le contexte change ร la fin du xviiie siรจcle. Les chapitres nobles font lโobjet dans toute la France dโune attention soutenue du pouvoir, ce qui contraint les Dames de Remiremont ร apporter les preuves dโune prรฉรฉminence chronologique, temporelle et symbolique. Abstract Between 1778 and 1788 the canonesses of the noble chapter of Remiremont asked the Franciscan Claude Vuillemin to draw up an inventory of their archives. Vuillemin worked not only on this inventory, but also on the cartulary of the chapter, and in addition compiled on his own initiative the Monuments, which are collections of disparate pieces related to the history of the chapter. This article examines the Vuilleminโs working methods and their conformity with documentary practices of his time so as to determine the issues at stake. If the last abbesses were vigilant in the administration of their archives, it is the context that changes at the end of the 18th century. Throughout France noble chapters were under close surveillance by authorities, which obliged the Dames de Remiremont to provide proof of a chronological, temporal and symbolic preeminence. Abstract Zwischen 1778 und 1788 beauftragten die Kanonikerinnen des adligen Kapitels von Remiremont den Franziskaner Claude Vuillemin mit der Erstellung eines Inventars ihrer Archive. Vuillemin arbeitete nicht nur an diesem Inventar, sondern auch am Kartular des Kapitels und stellte darรผber hinaus auf eigene Initiative neben dieser Arbeit eine Sammlung ganz verschiedener Schriftstรผcke zur Geschichte des Kapitels zusammen: die Monuments. In diesem Artikel sollen Vuillemins Arbeitsweise bei der Bewรคltigung dieser Herausforderungen und ihre รbereinstimmung mit den dokumentarischen Gepflogenheiten seiner Zeit untersucht werden. Dass die letzten รbtissinnen bei der Verwaltung der Archive so wachsam waren, ist darauf zurรผckzufรผhren, dass sich die zeitlichen Umstรคnde gegen Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts รคnderten. Die adligen Kapitel waren in ganz Frankreich Gegenstand einer anhaltenden Aufmerksamkeit von Seiten der Machthaber ausgesetzt, was die Damen von Remiremont dazu zwang, ihre chronologische, zeitliche und symbolische Vorrangstellung nachzuweisen.
In 2022, the Japanese government is strongly proposing to focus on developing the Web3 industry. The government is exploring the use of NFTs to commercialize content such as Japanese animations and games as Web3 businesses. NFT (Non-Fungible Token) means "unique and non-substitutable data unit recorded in blockchain". NFT indicates the owner of digital content by linking the NFT with digital content such as image or audio data. On the other hand, NFTs are constructed using complex technologies such as โblockchainโ and โsmart contractsโ. For this reason, many people do not understand the technical mechanism of NFTs. There are also aspects of excessive expectations for NFTs based on misunderstandings. I think that the bubble caused by excessive expectations negatively affects the development of technology. Therefore, in this research, I investigated what kind of value people find after understanding the mechanism of NFTs. Also, based on the survey, I find the functions desired for NFTs. Specifically, I made a video for non-technical people to easy to understand how NFTs work. And I showed the non-technical people the video with a demonstration of NFT tampering. After showing the video to the viewers, I surveyed them to investigate how their understanding of NFTs and the perceived value of NFTs changed. As a result, people understood that NFTs were not used as keys to access contents, but rather as a way to brag about what the holders had.
Korea Copyright Commission, Hyunjeong Lee, Daeheon Bae
โGenerative Artโ is a artistic work in which some or all of the work is produced using an autonomous system programmed with algorithms; it is a field of Digital Art. This art form has existed for years, but works were not properly evaluated since it is difficult to prove what is original. However, with the advent of Non-Fungible Tokens(NFTs), the original can now be verified, and thus this art form has achieved rapid growth over the last few years. This study examined whether Generative Art can be protected by the current Copyright Act. To this end, it classified Generative Art creation based on the level of contribution by human into four different types. 1)A type in which humans create works using software, 2)a type in which humans create parts and combine them with algorithms, 3)a type in which works are created with mathematical functions, and 4)a type in which works are created using Artificial Intelligence(AI). This study also sought ways to protect works created by AI, which are not protected under the current Copyright Act. In addition, it examined how to protect Generative Art by reviewing whether the exemption provisions of Online Service Providers(OSP) can be applied when a violated work is traded on an NFT platform.
The purpose of this study is to analyze the types of utilization and internal value of non-fungible token(NFT) fashion. The research method was a literature review that involved referring to professional books, papers, articles, and websites on NFT and virtual fashion, and 112 NFT fashion works were collected and analyzed based on the findings of a related keyword search. NFT was found to be applied to various fields, such as art, collections, social networks, games, and real estate by applying uniqueness and scarcity to digital assets using blockchain technology. The types of use of NFT fashion were found to be as follows. First, collectable NFT fashion, with its unique design and scarcity is receiving investment. In addition, limited-edition sneakers, bags, and high fashion costumes have artistic value and provide brand value and special experiences. Second, game-type NFT fashion mainly appears as avatars, accessories, and weapon items created in collaboration with luxury fashion brands and Metaverse game platforms. NFT fashion, which applies the patterns and symbols of luxury fashion brands, is becoming a means of showing off oneโs wealth and status in the digital world. Third, advertising and event-type NFT fashion which appears as an agreement between companies, a red-carpet AR dress, the first NFT fashion magazine and film, and limited-edition figures, has great influence and popularity. Three types of internal value of NFT fashion were found: (1) play value through games and fantasies, (2) sustainability value through virtual experiences, and (3) economic value through scarcity.
Cyber content using NFT is rapidly increasing. Since there is no law stipulating NFT in the current laws, there is concern about confusion in the case of legal problems. NFT, non-fungible token, is a virtual token that uses block chain technology to identify and prove the owner of digital assets. and to represent and prove ownership. Although NFT is currently widely used in fields such as meta verse and works of art, there is no legal regulation on the concept of NFT or specific rights under the current law, so normative research and legislative improvement are urgently needed. Regardless of whether or not there are legal regulations, NFT can prove that it is unique through the contents of meta data, so that even if it is a similar NFT product, it can be technically verified whether it is genuine or not. In the rapidly expanding meta verse space, it is necessary to confirm who owns the economic value of the goods being traded. Although it is widely used in various fields, there is no related law, which can lead to confusion. Therefore, NFT-related regulations should be prepared urgently. In addition, it is necessary to establish a global standard so that the NFT industry can grow. Under the current law, legal issues related to NFT are as follows: Whether NFT is a virtual asset, Whether NFT is a financial product, Whether NFT is subject to tax payment if it is a virtual asset with property value, Whether NFT is copyright protection because it proves that the ownership belongs to a specific person, Whether NFT belongs to a game item, if itโs applied to a game product, and Whether NFT is a security item that should be protected from hacking. Under the current law, NFT should not be limited to discussion, but should be declared as a clear legal concept through prompt legislation.
NFT, a technology that stores digital file owners and transaction records through blockchain and converts them into digital assets, has boomed in the digital art field. Digital art, in which the uniqueness of a work was difficult to prove and which was infinitely able to replicate the prototype, was produced as NFT and proved originality, causing a paradigm shift for digital assets. The remarkable growth of NFT in the art market is affecting other content, and video content is no exception. The use of NFT not only protects video content but also serves as a new source of revenue by expanding intellectual property rights. The United States, which already has the largest scale in the video content industry, has entered the market the fastest, while interest in NFT is growing in Korea. However, there has not been much research done on NFT as it is a new market. If the case collection and analysis of the current situation is supported, more opportunities can be created in the industry. This study aims to explore the possibility of NFT in the IP expansion of video content through the analysis of cases.
Recently, digital artworks based on NFT (Non-Fungible Token) have often been sold at high prices, drawing a lot of attention. It is time to carefully examine whether NFT is an important technological means to bring new life to the digital art trade and copyright market, or is it just a mirage caused by some fanatics and irrational overheating. Therefore, this study examines the impact of NFT on the IP industry. To help understand NFT, the technologies underlying the creation and transaction of NFT, such as Blockchain, Bitcoin, and Ethereum, are explored. And based on this understanding, what NFT is and why it is creating a craze, the concept, characteristics, creation and transaction method of NFT, utilization and its limitations are reviewed. Transactions through NFT are expected to cause various confusion in the area of intellectual property law. In conjunction with digital transformation, it will accelerate the โdigitization of assetsโ and deepen the separation of ownership and copyright over digital assets. The conflict between ownership and copyright is expected to develop into the question of whether the doctrine of rights exhaustion is applied to digital works and whether the exercise of copyright can be restricted. Also, due to the decentralized nature of NFT, the role of intermediaries who mediate creators and consumers will be reduced, and it seems necessary to discuss whether it is appropriate to apply the current online service provider exemption scheme to the responsibilities of NFT trading site. In addition, in the patent and trademark system, it is expected that a problem will arise whether transactions through NFTs can be subsumed into โpracticeโ under the Patent Act or โuseโ under the Trademark Act. And as NFT is used as a technical means to authenticate the ownership of digital assets, it is expected to become a catalyst for making the fandom industry and game industry larger. It is time for regulators and lawyers to take creative approaches and new perspectives to become laws and systems that play a role in helping science and technology can be used for humans, not as a means of hindering development and innovation.
๋ฐ์ดํฐ ๊ฒฝ์ (data economy)์ ์๋๋ฅผ ๋ง์ดํ๊ณ ์์์๋ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ฅผ ๋๋ฌ์ผ ์ฌ๋ฒ(็งๆณ)์์ ๋ฒ๋ฅ ๊ด๊ณ๋ ์์ง๋ ๋ถ๋ถ๋ช ํ๋ค. ํ์ฌ์ ํต์ค์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ ๋ฏผ๋ฒ์ ๋ฌผ๊ฑด(๋ฏผ๋ฒ ์ 98์กฐ)์ ํด๋นํ์ง ์์ผ๋ฏ๋ก ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ์ด ์ ์ฉ๋ ์ ์๋ค๊ณ ๋ณด๊ณ ์์ผ๋ฉฐ, ๊ทธ ๋์ ๊ณ์ฝ๋ฒ ๋ด์ง ๋ถ๋ฒํ์๋ฒ์ผ๋ก์ ํฌ์ญ์ ํตํด ๊ทธ ๋ฒ๋ฅ ๊ด๊ณ๋ฅผ ๊ท๋ช ํ๋ ค ์๋ํ๊ณ ์๋ค. ๊ทธ๋ฌ๋ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ๊ดํ ๋ฒ์ ๊ท์จ์ ์ค๊ณํจ์ ์์ด์๋ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ์ข ๋ฅ ๋ด์ง ์ ํ๋ณ ์ฐจ์ด์ ์ ๊ณ ๋ คํ์ฌ์ผ ํจ์๋ ํต์ค์ ์ด๋ฅผ ๊ฐ๊ณผํ๊ณ ์๋ค. ํนํ ์ต๊ทผ์๋ ์ํธํํ(cryptocurrency)๋ฅผ ๋น๋กฏํ์ฌ โ ๊ทธ ์์ฒด๋ก ๊ฒฝํฉ์ ์ด๋ฉฐ(๊ฒฝํฉ์ฑ), โก ์ผ์ ํ ์ฃผ์ฒด์ ์ฌ์ฉ⋅์์ต์ ๋ฐฐ์ ํ ์ ์๊ณ (๋ฐฐ์ ์ฑ), โข ํน์ ํ ํ์ธ์ ํ์์ ์์กดํ์ง ์๊ณ ์กด๋ฆฝํ ์ ์์ด(์กด๋ฆฝ์ฑ) ์ ์ฒด๋ฌผ๊ณผ ๋๋ฑํ ์์ค์ผ๋ก ๊ด๋ฆฌ๊ฐ ๊ฐ๋ฅํ ｢์ ์ฒด๋ฌผ-๋๋ฑ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ｣๊ฐ ์ถํํ์๋๋ฐ, ๋ชจ๋ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ ๋ณธ์ง์ ์ผ๋ก ๋น๊ฒฝํฉ์ ๋ด์ง ๋น๋ฐฐ์ ์ ์ด๋ผ๋ ์ ์ ์ ์ ๊ฐํ์ฌ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ์ ์ํ ๊ท์จ ๊ฐ๋ฅ์ฑ์ ์ผ๊ด์ ์ผ๋ก ๋ถ์ ํด ์จ ํต์ค์ ๋ ์ด์ ์ ํจํ์ง ์๊ฒ ๋์๋ค. ์ด๋ฌํ ๋ฌธ์ ์์ ํ์ ์ด ๊ธ์ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ, ํนํ ์ ์ฒด๋ฌผ-๋๋ฑ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๊ฐ ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ์ ์ํด ๊ท์จ๋ ์ ์๋์ง ์ฌ๋ถ๋ฅผ ์ ๋ฉด์ผ๋ก ๋ค๋ฃฌ๋ค. ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ์ฌ๋ฒ์ ๋ฒ๋ฅ ๊ด๊ณ๋ฅผ ๊ท๋ช ํ๊ธฐ ์ํ์ฌ ๊ตญ๋ด์ธ์์ ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ ์ธ์๋ ๋ค์ํ ์ ๊ทผ๋ฒ์ด ์๋๋์ด ์จ ๊ฒ์ ์ฌ์ค์ด๋, ์ต์ํ ์ ์ฒด๋ฌผ-๋๋ฑ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ์ ๊ดํ์ฌ๋ ๊ฒฝ์ ๋ฒ, ๊ฐ์ธ์ ๋ณด ๋ณดํธ๋ฒ, ์ง์ ์ฌ์ฐ๊ถ๋ฒ ๋ฑ ๋ฏผ๋ฒ ์ธ์์์ ์ ๊ทผ์ด๋ ๋ฏผ๋ฒ ๋ด์์ ํต์ค์ด ์ทจํ๊ณ ์๋ ๊ณ์ฝ๋ฒ ๋ฐ ๋ถ๋ฒํ์๋ฒ์ ๊ธฐ์ดํ ์ ๊ทผ ๋ชจ๋ ๋ถ์ ํฉ ๋ด์ง ๋ถ์ถฉ๋ถํ ๊ฒ์ผ๋ก ๋ณด์ด๊ธฐ ๋๋ฌธ์ด๋ค. ๋ฏธ๊ตญ⋅๋ ์ผ⋅์ผ๋ณธ ๋ฐ ๊ตญ๋ด์ ๊ด๋ จ ๋ ผ์๋ฅผ ๋นํ์ ์ผ๋ก ๊ฒํ ํจ์ผ๋ก์จ, ์ด ๊ธ์ ํ ํ๋ฒ์ ํด์์์ผ๋ก๋ ๋ฌผ๊ฑด, ์ ์ , ์์ ๊ถ ๋ฐ ๋ด๋ณด๋ฌผ๊ถ ๋ฑ ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ ์ ๋ฐ์ ๊ฑธ์ณ ์ ์ฒด๋ฌผ-๋๋ฑ ๋ฐ์ดํฐ๋ฅผ ํ์ฌ์ ๋ฌผ๊ถ๋ฒ ์ง์์ ์กฐํ๋กญ๊ฒ ํธ์ ์ํค๋ ๊ฒ์ด ๊ฐ๋ฅํจ์ ๋ฐํ๋ ํํธ, ๊ทธ ๋ฒ๊ฒฝ์ ํ์ ⋅๋ฒ์ฒ ํ์ ์ ๋นํ๋ฅผ ์ ์ํ๋ค.Although the age of the data economy has arrived, civil juristic relations regarding data are still opaque. Until now, the vast majority of Korean academia have concluded that data cannot be a โthingโ under Korean Civil Code ยง 98 and hence the law of property cannot be applied. Instead, they have relied on either contract law or tort law to resolve the issue. Nevertheless, the majority opinion stated above has overlooked an obvious fact that one must consider the differences among various types of data when designing the relevant legal system. In particular, as the tangible-equivalent data – data satisfying rivalrousness, excludability and independent-existence conditions defined by this article – has recently emerged, the majority opinion based on the obsolete premise that all data are essentially non-rivalrous and non-excludable has become no longer valid. Based on this observation, this article addresses whether data, especially the tangible-equivalent data can be regulated by the law of property. Although domestic and foreign scholars have strived in various ways to determine civil juristic relations regarding data, it seems that neither non-civil law approaches based on laws such as antitrust law, privacy law, intellectual property law nor traditional civil law approaches based on contract law or tort law are suitable for the tangible-equivalent data. By examining existing researches in the United States, Germany, Japan and Korea, this article illustrates that by interpretation it is possible to incorporate the tangible-equivalent data into the law of property covering the legal issues of thing(res or Sache), possession, ownership and security interests, while presenting economic and philosophical justifications.
With blockchain technology, information is recorded in a permanent distributed ledger that is maintained by multiple computers in a peer-to-peer network. There is no central authority that can alter records or change network consensus rules. Such technology could be utilized for voting, title transfers, issuance of company shares, document notarization, but currently, the most popular use-case are virtual currencies. An interesting feature that some virtual currencies have is a multisignature (multisig) protocol that requires the electronic signatures from more than one private key to initiate a transfer of funds. Raw data of a multisig transaction may be recognized as an arbitral award under the New York Convention, where the law of England is the lex arbitri and parties have opted-out of a reasoned award.