Smart contracts are key elements of decentralized financial protocols, but security incidents are usually caused not by single vulnerabilities, but by combined scenarios in which several threats interact and reinforce each other. The article proposes a synergistic graph model of threats in DeFi smart contracts, which formalizes the set of threats, their impact on information security properties (confidentiality, integrity, availability, authenticity, accountability, and auditability), and reflects the projection of compromised properties onto security domains (CS/IS/SI). The proposed approach differs in that it introduces synergistic links between threats as a separate type of edges in the graph, which allows reproducing characteristic trajectories of combined attacks and explaining the mechanisms of their implementation. In particular, a typical chain of economic attacks is shown, in which an attacker uses an instant unsecured loan to manipulate the market price, which leads to a distortion of the oracle's price data and, as a result, creates conditions for exploiting logical defects in the smart contract or abusing liquidation mechanisms. The proposed model can be used as a methodological basis for risk analysis, prioritization of smart contract audits, and planning of protective measures in DeFi ecosystems.
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).
Stablecoins have been heralded as the future of money on distributed ledgers. As was discussed in the previous chapter, stablecoins purport to mitigate the wild fluctuations that are experienced by cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin by providing for a one-to-one reserve of a denominated fiat currency that holders can redeem at any time. Yet, despite these built-in mitigating factors, stablecoins have still been plagued by runs and a lack of transparency into their operations. As such, the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) provides an interesting opportunity to see if the digital equivalent of fiat currency can offer increased efficiencies over conventional paper-based currency. 1 Moreover, can these efficiencies be leveraged to other sectors of the economy thereby stimulating more economic growth for all?
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.
This paper explores the various impacts of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, stablecoins, NFTs, and CBDCs, on the world economy. The study, based on a systematic review of the academic literature, and on secondary data collected from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, CoinMarketCap and Chainalysis, reveals that digital assets at the same time provide enhanced financial access, lower transaction costs, but also present greater volatility, regulatory uncertainty, and systemic contagion risk. The quantitative data analysis for the market capitalisation of cryptocurrencies shows a trajectory from ~US$200 bn (2018) to US$2.2 tn (2024), while the volatility indices for Bitcoin prices are almost triple those of equities. Recommendations cover aspects of adaptive regulation, CBDC development and international coordination. The tokens mentioned in the text are all digital assets, cryptocurrencies, or blockchain-based tokens.All of the tokens referred to in the text are either Digital assets, Cryptocurrencies, or Blockchain based tokens.
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.
This chapter provides a comprehensive exploration of alternative cryptocurrencies, commonly referred to as altcoins, within the context of digital forensic investigations. It begins by establishing a foundational understanding of what altcoins are, delineating them from Bitcoin, and classifying their various types based on technological features and use cases. The chapter then addresses the unique forensic challenges posed by altcoins, including privacy mechanisms, transaction obfuscation techniques, and decentralised architectures that hinder traceability. Subsequent sections outline a structured approach to the technical forensic processes specific to altcoin investigations, followed by real-world case studies that highlight investigative methodologies and outcomes. The chapter concludes with an analysis of forensic tools tailored to altcoin environments and presents a practical forensic puzzle – The Zero-Taint Coin Challenge – to illustrate theoretical concepts through hands-on problem-solving. The overall objective is to equip forensic practitioners with the knowledge and tools necessary to navigate the complexities of altcoin-related investigations.
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.
Orfeas Anastasios Koidis, Francesco Giumelli, Oskar Josef Gstrein
Purpose There is a growing debate about the use of cryptocurrencies to evade sanctions. This paper aims to systematically collect and organize the available literature on cryptocurrencies and sanctions evasion. The aim is to map the debate, identify gaps and clarify the implications for global governance and the international order. Design/methodology/approach This research conducted a systematic literature review using a keyword-string search method across relevant databases. Due to limited peer-reviewed literature, additional “grey” literature was included to broaden the evidence base. Findings The mapping reveals a fragmented debate over a strong link between cryptocurrencies and sanctions evasion grounded in cryptocurrencies’ design features. It identifies three main gaps concerning the scale of this form of evasion, the mechanisms through which it operates, and whether it represents a novel challenge or a reconfiguration of established practices under new technical infrastructure. Further research on these issues would contribute to an enhanced understanding of sovereignty, global governance and power. Originality/value While much of the literature on cryptocurrencies and illicit finance has centred on money laundering, their role in sanctions evasion remains underexplored. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper provides the first systematic consolidation of the dispersed academic and policy literature on the topic. It brings together peer-reviewed research and verified grey literature into a consolidated evidence base that can serve as a stepping stone for future debates and research on cryptocurrency-enabled sanctions evasion.
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 study aimed to highlight the importance of smart contracts in our digital age, This is achieved by exploring the possibility of finding a legal framework capable of creating a balance between the use of smart contracts on the one hand and protecting the rights of its parties on the other. The descriptive-analytical approach was adopted when analyzing legal and jurisprudential opinions on whether a smart contract is considered a real contract. One of the main conclusions reached was that a fully automated smart contract is considered a legal contract in the true sense of the word, and therefore the study recommended the need to enact international and national legislation regulating the provisions of this contract.
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.
The burgeoning proliferation of digital assets (cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens, stablecoins and other forms of financial instruments, which exist on a blockchain) has revealed deep flaws in established insolvency frameworks around the world. This article considers the three inseparable legal issues of the legal characterization of digital assets as 'property', 'valuation' of volatile digital assets during insolvency and 'recovery' of such assets in an era of borderless technology. It uses the jurisdictions of Singapore and India as models in an effort to show that Singapore's forward-looking legislative framework-supported by the Payment Services Act 2019, the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 and a robust case law framework-offers a robust and informative blueprint for states seeking to revise their insolvency frameworks. Despite being home to more than 115 million digital asset users and a large domestic market, India lacks legislative provisions to deal with digital asset insolvency. Finally, this article offers specific suggestions for the amendment of India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, trans-border insolvency regimes and the regulatory framework applied to digital asset service providers.
This study examines the transformation of property rights amid rapid digital innovation, focusing on how legal systems are adapting to address the inheritance of virtual assets alongside traditional physical property. The rise of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, non-fungible tokens (NFTs), digital accounts, and online intellectual property, has created significant gaps in existing inheritance laws. Using doctrinal and comparative legal analysis, the study reviews national and international frameworks to identify inconsistencies, accountability deficits, and equity concerns. The findings reveal that most jurisdictions lack specific legislation governing digital inheritance, creating systemic disadvantages for heirs. The study concludes by recommending harmonized legal standards, mandatory digital estate-planning mechanisms, and proactive regulatory reforms to ensure equal inheritance rights regardless of asset type.
Decentralized Finance (DeFi) promised to eliminate traditional financial intermediaries and hierarchies, replacing them with trustless, automated, and decentralized systems. However, the reality of DeFi governance reveals how disintermediation does not equate to the absence of conflicts or trust issues; instead, it shifts them into new, less-regulated domains. Cryptoenterprises—known as financial Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs)—operate without traditional corporate governance mechanisms such as boards of directors or managerial oversight, which only rely on computer code for governance. Misaligned incentives, governance opacity, and unchecked insider control cause conflicts between insiders (cryptopromoters) and investors (cryptoasset holders). This article examines the emerging role of cryptogatekeepers: a new category of cryptointermediaries that counterbalance these governance failures. It explores the structural deficiencies of cryptoenterprises, including the absence of internal monitoring mechanisms, fiduciary duties, and investor protections. The analysis highlights how cryptopromoters—those in control of DeFi protocols—retain significant decision-making power while obscuring accountability, leading to agency problems reminiscent of traditional finance sans regulatory safeguards By assessing the function of cryptointermediaries as potential de facto governance enforcers, this article argues that cryptogatekeepers can introduce a layer of oversight that compensates for the governance void in DeFi. It outlines best practices for mitigating conflicts of interest, enhancing disclosure standards, and improving the monitoring of cryptointermediaries. The study also considers transnational regulatory approaches to bolster accountability in DeFi through proposing mechanisms such as cryptointermediary registries, mutual recognition of licensed cryptointermediaries, and standardized reporting frameworks. Ultimately, this article contends that while DeFi presents an innovative model for financial services, it cannot escape fundamental governance challenges. The rise of cryptogatekeepers suggests that some level of re-intermediation is inevitable and necessary to balance decentralization with maintaining investor protection and market integrity.
Este trabalho propõe-se a discutir a proteção dos Direitos Autorais em uma nova forma de adquirir e investir em arte digital: a criptoarte. Utilizando-se do método hipotético-dedutivo, o problema de pesquisa ao qual o presente trabalho pretende responder é se a criptoarte encontra-se dentro do campo de incidência do Direito Autoral. Parte-se da hipótese inicial afirmativa, de que a criptoarte é passível de proteção pelo Direito Autoral, estando portando, dentro do campo de incidência do Direito Autoral, dado que a regra geral é o reconhecimento da paternidade da obra e consequente remuneração do autor. Observou-se que a arte digital em si não é novidade, mas a possibilidade de comercialização e comprovação de autenticidade e unicidade ocorre graças às tecnologias da criptografia e da blockchain e aos non-fungible tokens (NFTs) que ficam permanentemente vinculados à obra. Considerando que a criptoarte trata-se de uma obra com finalidades estéticas, e não uma obra utilitária, que possui um autor pessoa física, e que a regra é a proteção da obra e consequente remuneração dos autores e/ou titulares, tais obras encontram proteção no instituto do Direito Autoral. Não obstante, considerando que a lei de Direitos Autorais (Lei nº 9.610/98) possui três campos distintos, de incidência, de isenção e de imunidade, verifica-se por fim, corroborada a hipótese inicial, de que a criptoarte perfaz os requisitos necessários para estar no campo da incidência.
Abstract This chapter examines non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that purportedly embody rights in creative works, revealing a fundamental disconnect between marketing claims and legal reality. It traces the evolution of NFTs from technical experiments through speculative fervor, collapse, and resurgence, establishing the economic and social context for legal analysis. The chapter identifies two dominant issuance models: the standardized approach using platforms like OpenSea and Mintable, and the bespoke approach employed by major issuers, including Yuga Labs and Dapper Labs. For standardized issuances, an examination of the terms of service reveals that while claiming to be passive facilitators, platforms retain substantial control and explicitly deny any property link between NFTs and underlying creative works. For bespoke issuers, the analysis demonstrates a mischaracterization of property law, including claims that ownership is “mediated” by blockchain technology, attempts to condition property rights through contractual terms, and intellectual property licensing frameworks that are indeterminate and potentially invalid across jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the chapter argues that NFTs possess genuine commercial potential, which could be unlocked if they were structured in a manner consistent with established private law frameworks rather than attempting to circumvent them, as is the case in the present landscape. It concludes by proposing legitimate commercial applications, including pure digital collectibles, access-gated services, and digital certificates of authenticity that embrace legal frameworks while delivering meaningful market value.
William Fernando Martínez Luna, Ana María Moreno Ballesteros, Edgar José Ruiz Dorantes
Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are transforming the commercialisation of digital art by establishing unique blockchain identifiers that ensure authenticity and certify subsequent transactions. However, the transfer of control over an NFT does not automatically include the transfer of the associated copyrights, thereby creating legal uncertainty as to what rights are actually acquired. This interdisciplinary project between engineering and law proposes the design of a smart contract, based on the ERC-721 standard, to manage the transfer of property rights linked to digital artworks represented as NFTs. The accompanying legal contract incorporates essential clauses covering the identification of the parties, a description of the artwork and its link to the token, pricing, royalties, and the terms of rights transfer. The proposal seeks to integrate blockchain technology with existing legal frameworks, offering an innovative solution that strengthens legal certainty in the transfer of copyright within digital environments.
This study examines the latent common volatility factor in cryptocurrency markets using daily data for ten major cryptocurrencies from January 2018 to September 2025. It estimates the common volatility factor (COVOL) within the factor-volatility framework of Engle and Campos-Martins (2023) and it identifies its determinants using machine learning and SHAP analysis. Results reveal a statistically significant common volatility factor that intensifies during major macroeconomic events and crypto-specific shocks. Bitcoin exhibits the highest exposure, while global financial stress and investor sentiment are found to be the primary drivers. This paper provides the first direct estimation of a common volatility factor in cryptocurrency markets, demonstrating their increasing integration with global financial conditions and offering important implications for risk management and portfolio diversification.