Blockchain Papers

Vasil Gechev

No abstract is available for this record.

Timothy T. Hsieh

No abstract is available for this record.

Emily Behzadi

No abstract is available for this record.

Paul Torremans

The DSM Directive preserves, on the one hand, the public domain, by restricting copyright in faithful reproductions of public domain works. On the other hand, there are copyright opportunities for digital art and non-fungible tokens. The Directive also creates opportunities for preservation and digitization for cultural heritage institutions. There are opportunities there that can be put to good and productive use in the interest of all parties involved. Extended collective licensing and measures for out-of-commerce works can also play a role here. And moral rights will not be a hindrance in that respect if industry standards of the digital era are observed. It is therefore important to continue and to strengthen the dialogue between the cultural heritage institution community on the one hand and the copyright and related rights community on the other hand.

Brett Hemenway, Bin Gu, Gerry Tsoukalas, Niuniu Zhang

Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) are transforming how content creators, such as artists, price and sell their work. A key feature of NFTs is the inclusion of royalties, which grant creators a share of all future resale proceeds. Although widely used, critics argue that sophisticated speculators, who dominate NFT markets, simply price in royalties upfront, neutralizing their impact. We show this intuition holds only under perfect, frictionless markets. Under more realistic market conditions, royalties enable creators to capitalize on the presence of speculators in at least three ways: They can enable risk sharing (under risk aversion), mitigate information asymmetry (when speculators are better informed), and unlock price discrimination benefits (in multi-unit settings). Moreover, in all three cases, royalties meaningfully expand trade, implying increased transaction volume for platforms. These results offer testable predictions that can guide both empirical research and platform design.

Wellett Potter

The post-COVID-19 era is an age of disruption, which presents significant social, cultural and technological challenges and opportunities for society at large. There has been substantial wealth generation fuelled from digital currencies, which has led to interest and sales of Non-Fungible Tokens ('NFTs') and their associated assets. This article will examine the growth and hype about artistic NFTs in the context of recent years. It will then examine the application of current Australian copyright laws to such NFTs and their assets to determine subsistence and infringement of these works. The notion of what it means to 'own' an NFT will be examined. When applying traditional proprietary notions of ownership to NFTs, it will be seen that they have the capacity to challenge established norms which have evolved in a material, pre-technological world. Finally, this article will ponder the question as to whether a new type of virtual ownership right is emerging for NFTs and their associated assets.

Miša Bajčetić

The paper aims at determining the utility of NFTs within the current EU framework of copyright, specifically from the authors' perspective. The issues of technical feasibility and scale of adoption remain beyond the scope of the paper; the focus lies rather on the legal aspects, particularly the case law of the CJEU. For authors, the NFT landscape is currently filled with potential economic benefits, as well as perils. With this in mind, the paper anticipates future legislative and judicial interventions in the new area. The paper's answer to whether NFTs could be relevant for copyright law is a resounding "yes", potentially allowing the effortless dissemination of content to finally work in the authors' favor, instead of incurring enforcement costs. Interestingly enough, the answer is justified with the example of tokenized internet memes.

Ayomide Awoyemi

No abstract is available for this record.

Mark Fenwick, Paulius Jurčys

No abstract is available for this record.

Ifeanyi E. Okonkwo

Abstract The invention of disruptive technologies broadens the horizon of opportunities for intellectual property owners. The very idea of selling copyright works in a digital space and using the same to form a digital currency is disruptive. This is one opportunity Non-Fungible Token (NFT) offers. But that disruptiveness raises certain questions and provoke the consciousness to wonder if NFTs are a form of intellectual property, or whether NFT would shift the paradigm of copyright law as we know it. Governments through her agencies are also caught in the unrestlessness of deciphering what NFT means and whether it holds any value for intellectual property. This article will address the relationship between NFT and copyright, the forseeable problems and solutions, and how NFTs are channels for intellectual property commercialisation.

Almigdad Yahya, Adib Habbal

This paper briefly discusses the modern music industry setting and blockchain technology and how blockchain can be used to create a better music industry for the benefit of artist. The music industry is big and complex which generated a lot of problems for both the artist side and the industry as corporations and also put the artists and music labels and management at odds which has participated in a making the music industry a very bad environment and full of mistrust. Blockchain is classified by Gartner as one of the top ten strategic technologies in 2019, blockchain is based in distributed set or records linked together forming a chain, these records are held by different entities in a peer-to-peer network these entities work together to secure the information in the chain. by analyzing how the industry works and also present some use cases of the use of blockchain within the music industry. the paper gives a proposal to a new royalty payments system based on the environment of the blockchain technology. The paper also gives a brief about the challenges and road blocks that may face the implementation of the technology within the music industry.

Kristin B. Cornelius

Transparency and accountability are important aspects to any technological endeavor and are popular topics of research as many everyday items have become ‘smart’ and interact with user data on a regular basis. Recent technologies such as blockchain tout these traits through the design of their infrastructure and their ability as recordkeeping mechanisms. This project analyzes and compares records produced by non-fungible tokens (NFTs), an increasingly popular blockchain application for recording and trading digital assets, and compares them to ‘document standards,’ an interdisciplinary method of contract law, diplomatics, document/interface theory, and evidentiary proof, to see if they live up to the bar that has been set by a body of literature concerned with authentic documents. Through a close reading of the current policies on transparency (i.e., CCPA, GDPR), compliance and recordkeeping (i.e., FCPA, SOX, UETA), and the consideration of blockchain records as user-facing interfaces, this study draws the conclusion that without an effort to design these records with these various concerns in mind and from the perspectives of all three stakeholders (Users, Firms, and Regulators), any transparency will only be illusory and could serve the opposite purpose for bad actors if not resolved.

Hugo Leonardo Barboza, Ariê Scherreier Ferneda, Liz Beatriz Sass

O presente artigo tem como objetivo analisar a garantia de autenticidade por meio de Non-Fungible Tokens e a (in)validade para a proteção de obras intelectuais, com especial enfoque às obras artísticas. A pesquisa foi desenvolvida por meio do método hipotético-dedutivo, lastreado na revisão bibliográfica, e se justifica em razão do crescente número de comunidades de artistas que aderem à exposição e venda de suas criações em galerias digitais e transacionam em um Blockchain. Em um primeiro momento, estudou-se a proteção da propriedade intelectual, destacando-se convenções internacionais sobre a temática, bem como as disposições da legislação brasileira; e, em segundo momento, foi estudado o conceito de artes digitais, para fins de avaliar, posteriormente, a (in)validade do registro das obras por meio de NFT’s. Como resultado da pesquisa, conclui-se que o NFT se apresenta como uma possível solução para garantia de autoria e autenticidade das produções no espaço cibernético, embora ainda restem dúvidas sobre a segurança que esta tecnologia efetivamente possa atestar.

陳宏志

區塊鏈科技自2008年底問世後，在金融或運輸等產業應用已蔚成風潮。因其具備可追蹤追溯及不易竄改之特色，有助於簡化流程、避免中介機構剝削，及能確保資料安全與掌握數位足跡。且結合代幣等功能，可使高價值之商品或服務所有權，或著作權等無形資產，讓更多人享有，如自2019年起已有部分企業，將藝術品與區塊鏈之代幣技術進行結合。而2021年之NFT（Non-Fungible Tokens）應用，更讓許多純數位著作，如一則Twitter訊息，於拍賣創下天價。因博物館主要任務為蒐藏、研究、展示、教育及公共服務，尤其確認蒐藏適法性為博物館管理重點之一。本文透過檢視現行法規及國內外案例，聚焦數位著作搭配區塊鏈代幣化應用，所生《民法》之所有權及《著作權法》之授權兩項議題；研析後認為適法性已非窒礙，且此類純數位著作應有利於保存與利用。然在科技應用與蒐藏決策之間，面對強調特殊性、珍稀或管理需求之典藏品，其數位化、代幣化後，是否可以打破博物館經營者既有思考框架，決定納入典藏範圍等，突破關鍵應在於對新興科技之信任。

Nam-Yong Lee, Jinhong Yang, Chul‐Soo Kim

Several platform companies have been successful in competing with digital piracy by producing consumer-friendly services. Nowadays, however, the digital content service market has become more monopolized than ever, which forms barriers to the entry of new platform companies. The platform monopoly would cause considerable problems both to content providers and consumers as it limits the choice of consumers. To remove the platform monopoly in digital content markets, we propose a public blockchain-based digital content service method. The proposed method encrypts the digital content to a self-decryptable form, which we call Smart Propertized Digital Content (SPDC), and utilizes the decentralization and traceability of the public blockchain to provide a non-monopolistic ecosystem for the management and distribution of the SPDC license. The proposed method can be more beneficial both to content creators and users than the current winner-takes-all platform model. For instance, users can download SPDC once and play many times without requesting the decryption key, and SPDC owners can make SPDC licenses to be time-limited, device-limited, resellable, or terminated without resorting to help from other intermediaries. We conducted the threat analysis on the proposed method by examining possible attacks in various scenarios. Based on threat analysis, we conclude that the proposed method can provide a new type of digital content service ecosystem that can be operated in a completely decentralized way and neutrally beneficial to all participants.

Nate Day

The iconic video of a young baby biting his older brother’s finger is set to be auctioned as a non-fungible token

Xavier Foccroulle Ménard, Cécilia Barrette-Leduc

No abstract is available for this record.

Peyman Khezr, Vijay Mohan

No abstract is available for this record.

Andrés Guadamuz

Dr Andres Guadamuz is Reader in Intellectual Property Law, University of Sussex. This article This article tackles various questions regarding non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and copyright, including whether an author can use an NFT to transfer copyright, several applications of tokens as digital rights management, and the issue of potential copyright infringement in NFTs. These questions are analysed from a UK perspective, specifically looking at cases from England and Wales and Scotland, while also covering a few relevant Court of Justice of the European Union decisions. This is a relatively recent technology, which will require a lengthier technical explanation to analyse the legal issues that are raised. In some instances, the public perception will be dealt with as well, as it has become evident that there is considerable misunderstanding not only about what an NFT really is but also about the ownership and copyright issues that surround the technology. The article analyses the use of NFTs for digital rights purposes, particularly the transfer of rights, and while assignment by electronic is it is not whether an NFT can transfer to copyright it is the of article that the of a not copyright, there be a to the In a by considerable to a potential copyright in is for use of but is also as an in in is and it for considerable of a for in it of the in is an that the with and that be a non-fungible of the NFTs are the in the and technology. This not it not for the that the that the NFT transfer not only the ownership of the digital but the be the to the This the of and several legal questions as to whether be copyright is in the of a of an but also there the that to and in a to the of the The the that of and that only the of the but not of the The from The is the in a of that are legal questions regarding the copyright and NFTs. an a of a by it and it an of a as as an NFT for with the the is an use it to transfer copyright ownership a it a an NFT of a it This article will questions from a UK perspective, specifically looking at cases from England and and Scotland, while also covering a few relevant of the Court of Justice of the European Union This is a relatively recent technology, which will require a lengthier technical explanation to analyse the legal issues In some instances, the public perception will be dealt with as well, as it has become evident that there is considerable misunderstanding not only about what an NFT really is but also about the ownership and copyright issues that surround the technology. NFTs are not to copyright, and in some are to legal in of technical will the copyright also will some of the issues about the technology. about This will a to the of but is a that is not of about the of from various is not the of the to and the will be to NFTs at The from the of to the use of tokens for to the of that it for to from is to will not be the of of NFTs with the considerable of and which the of and as is not the of to in as by there is a in the of what is a and it can be in to copyright as it will become NFTs require a technical explanation the legal what the is are also of to a explanation of what the is and it what is an to tokens and as it will be that is a is a and which and public of by in an The is which that can and can an there are various there by a of that are to the will be about the as it is the it to but there are of the of is that of the of a is a digital of that is the are various of and can the a in the is a of which as an of the and can be The is in the that with the of tokens a of as The the for are by it not what are to be as and non-fungible are that are a a a use a as are that be relevant to copyright, as a for ownership transfer This for the will be tokens with digital is of an that can be in some digital as a a a The use of the NFT in the is a of of which in of NFT in and it tokens a In the of an including and digital it will be there are various of but the is a that that has with a digital of the that is is to the in as it is of the of the NFT This will be for the legal in the will an NFT as of a a are in which can that the technical and the of an NFT be to an of the in to use to digital can be an NFT in can use the to a that that can be to the This is that are and can at the and that is a with a and a of and the is and with the The NFT is a of that is the that various of The that be and some that are The to the NFT is a as the which is the of the the is the is a that can be in the a The of in the it there can only be in the with the of and the NFT is are that can be in the is the of the which the with in NFTs is the of a to the can be is the NFT is not the NFTs of the to in the of a of In a as an NFT that a a digital to a that is the in the of a the and is a digital that only to the In is what the NFT it is to be In can as of the as can the and the and the some considerable technical a NFTs are a are of NFT that the of an a that can to an to the in some instances, also to for the This is the to that will the The and and it is are to the an which a The is to the to the and an are to to in some what a as are for the NFT has several in it can be to can as but it can also be to and NFTs. is a that in the and is the is a by and can also be to is a be it a the and are to the The NFT can be it has in the and the the NFT NFT it can be the NFT is not the it is the that the of and is to that the NFT can as the of the the of the the copyright of the and as as The and the are the as are specifically to the and the to the be that the is not the and it is not a of the NFT by the of a that to the This will be in what the while the to the NFT and it to the the NFT is not the it is the that it to the is an are the as an is as NFTs to a of a This is as the NFT is not a it is a of a the ownership is not of the but ownership of the is of NFT the is in to the These are and are to as can only be and with the the NFT ownership of the are not that the to the in The for is that the of the is and is by In the of a of is at The of from to at the of to the in by to from the with the the it to the of is the of is become there are of the with of and that of be as as at the of the there is use in the to which is the NFTs of The can be by a can also be a and a an the of NFTs from a technical perspective, be for not about copyright at the an NFT is a that has a that not be to copyright be a the public as will be that is to can be an but the is only in the of the the of a of a and in there is with there is misunderstanding it to the ownership of an NFT and what it is an of of the NFT by and of as an The in the of which to that what is is the and not a digital of the for the of is the and a of In an NFT of in a which in The of several the as the and not a of the for the as an NFT for with the that the The and the is the not it for not the but an NFT of The is to the that are for NFT of a of a by digital for at while an NFT of a of in the for to that are of for what to a and a of and of but in is what NFTs This is the of that copyright is a NFTs as and not copyright are several copyright in some NFTs. are in which a be the questions of copyright which will be dealt with NFTs not a transfer of there are a few in which the to the an transfer of copyright ownership in the to in copyright the as copyright for a that the a to and is in the few are with copyright transfer in is an NFT that a copyright transfer of transfer in transfer in The to is whether a as a transfer of The and of copyright is of in with of the This that the of copyright not the with rights will the the for by and there is some for some of with to the of there is the of it is a for to what the will to the transfer of copyright, the UK and a copyright assignment that is by of the In the an assignment of copyright that the ownership of a will be to the The copyright assignment can be for of the ownership but also can be rights, for the author can rights to an of the author can to a a is of as it can the and of rights what and is that electronic can be to while a copyright assignment is not a as the relevant and with to and can what can be a it is also that there are in can be by a of as the of what is is to be to and of in a the the of what is has to various of from an electronic to an as copyright the of what is a has also in a has to be to the assignment can be and in electronic it to the This to be to in some as the assignment is in to the the is also to the use of electronic there is a The electronic in the UK is the which an electronic as in electronic which is to with in electronic and which is by the to of the that an electronic not be legal and as in legal the that it is in an electronic in is a of of as by the an can be a it the of it a as as the of the are and to various electronic it is not the of that is to an in the an NFT is a that the the can the is a that only the has The of England and Wales has in of what is a not only for a of but also for various electronic has also a recent by the UK looking specifically at as and that there is to that not be as electronic for legal in a has be a digital not it is in the to the use of a to a copyright be to what is as a legal that are by the of a This is a and there is the use of and as as it is that the is to a copyright assignment to what and the of a the of a and the of a be to the of an of that in there be a of as to whether a in the is regarding the of as there is that as of rights This a legal there be that the technical author can use an NFT to transfer ownership of a digital and also a in and with a to the that there has a transfer of This is the of some that are copyright transfer as of The is to what a that will with copyright in to a of copyright an NFT be in of digital rights in at some as potential copyright including and to a are also the use of NFTs specifically in the of the as potential of rights and with for digital the of NFTs has of the use has the transfer of the with a few to it is to NFTs that is not to that the potential is not In some NFTs be as a of as the as a of a in an NFTs also as some of and This a few in with technical and the can and can that is by the This that can of ownership and is the a from that not This is not an it will be in the it is as is an NFT the NFTs for and as of for to a the be an of a of the is with a copyright but is an the author has to there is an ownership in the it not that it is NFTs for with some of NFT but that not with of to in few are as which to a there is a of The has the NFT some of the and as and is not a but a there as a of and is a of that also as and which also in and are as and with a of as and with is in a that has some of and it is that it be for to an it it from an This is what is as in which a can a it as it from the about In it is to a of a to be a legal that a to an by copyright, can be as with an This a of the NFT at the of not in the of an This not that a not but that it is not to be is for an author to the of an NFT a to use the for a of of is the which as an NFT in for the of a of the the be to and the This that the is for the and not for the that the NFT to a is a of in the and the a to use of and for of the in the not the NFT The of the of an to and the for the of the that can ownership of the the NFT is not the it can be to ownership of the NFT to to the that can the The NFT is of the of the The of a is a in some of the NFT that some an NFT that can and to in The for of NFTs is the to be and the copyright will to the a to the and not to the is in the This the of for a The NFT has that a is not ownership of rights and not a The use of an NFT is to for a This is an the is really a for can that the use of NFTs for copyright assignment and is the of the to for what is is a of what of the and the of the there is that are NFTs at and is that are to of the an author and a at an the will in a the will transfer to the the will be from the to the it will it is is the can in a and NFT for of the in can a that a of the The of is that that is from the of the there will be of the from the from it from and will be to the of the for the NFT is not a transfer of rights the of rights to the as as as a and a of the transfer of the of for a and the author a of is not the will in to it for but it is an in NFTs. in which NFTs can in the of is in the of an in the to a of the the will a of that for as and the of but and In some is a technical a for of the is not to is to as it in a that the that for the the author also copyright the with the in the UK as by the which is in and The only to that from an that and the is the of the of the a a for a of to a while a in of The are also at The of the author the NFT is an that an NFT and the at will that is not to the of the and is also to the of the of the are to the various of the technology, with with and digital rights in The only is whether the can the This is to be is that of a at at the of the has in the of and the of be to the that what an NFT is not the but a of a the are the of NFTs to with and for a of the to the of the digital with a to a with a to a of the digital rights to be an of the the potential for copyright infringement a the of NFTs. the that about the technology, as as the that are for there is considerable for legal in This is not and are a few of copyright infringement and a at there the in some that NFTs and there an of in the public from the in that an are with of of potential infringement of the of the from the The legal copyright infringement is in the and In with the which by The is only a with but in that be an NFT of with the has is the copyright in the copyright a the and the is at the of it is to analyse at an there is that it several particularly whether there is copyright infringement in the of a This to be an to there be some of copyright infringement in the of an NFT that really to analyse what an NFT and it is is to an NFT is of a is it really to that and it to the is a of the technical of what is an NFT NFTs are a that has with a digital in a digital and it to of a and a The as a that in the as has The that is is a to the a copyright perspective, it is to the of an be copyright the NFT is not the but a of that with a the not be a of the an be looking at some of to the will to that there to be there are that be the of the rights of the author there is a and the of the a of has will of for of at whether there is a the can that a is from an in a technical to to a digital of the to an a can that the the of a from has and be there not be a and the as there is that in the of a the is to the of whether a has in in a the will the of the NFT is and to the there is of the and it be copyright as it has is the of the of NFTs are it is evident that there is of the as the is that not the at it is that with the is to while the NFT is there be a a with will that the for as it is can an of a as an that the rights of the the rights of the author are the rights of and public to the public and to of the of to will and to the at potential in the of the it has is an the is is not NFTs are an is to the and of the can various of the that are only from a of the to the which is by the with a the that has not the digital at the NFT of that be for digital of the to be for it be a digital of a use an that has the of a as there is to an of the also be for the the to an as a of the by the by a of a at a a at a a from a This be an a of a that the of the only a and not to the in the there is from that to the The is not a of the in of the there is of the in the an NFT be an is in the in and can only with an and The with in the an of a be a of a it a in which the is in in to a an be it a while for a an is by an a of the is to the of a with of relatively of it a to an NFT to be at whether an NFT is in some a of a to In cases there is some of of a there is a of the the looking at from is the of a from a not copyright, as in a of is not an of a in that not copyright in a by a with the a of to a and the of the by This to be an infringement by by that the an of a of what is an the is at to the and can a of the by the The is not of an the has to the to to an that the is an it can be to the but not to be the in of infringement in the of a be to analyse whether the NFT be a to the the to as a a to a NFT be to be a to the and to in at the technical of what is in a it has of the that is in the of an NFT is that the will to the digital that to the This is not but it is This is a to a to a The relevant for the is that the is not by the by the at some is the has a to the can be NFTs also to the can be as and In the and the can the to a as as it by looking at the by a as is to that the not it the be which is a is relevant for the of a to the public is that NFTs a not be the NFT not be In a it be to a a a the and it has to the there is about the of but it is to be of what the a to an of the The of the be a copyright some of the it be to has as a that as a of are in to the infringement be the NFT is a to the of the to that be a legal is that to an as in a is a to the public and can the of a relevant is the an the The that it to of and it a to the that there a as of the are to not from an is to use cases as to the in an and it is not to the of the of as it is the with as to an be to be The has with the of in recent and while some can a few The has that the and a of the to to the public to a of the to the has in a the of the author and the of the public to In the that the by of a not be a to a as the by the In the that the of a by the of the also not a to the the has become with recent decisions. In the to a from a to a in a in which of from The from the cases as it is that the is and that the is for The is that in the the about whether be cases with to the public dealt with the potential of of which can be to and be relevant to NFT and it is to that an NFT that a to an of the be to be a to the public in some particularly it is evident that the has of the The is as the is for there is a to be there to the public as the from a that is as it has the is in the that the is it not be as to as the is the be in a that has not with the This is The be to copyright of an NFT with of an NFT with In to the has to some of the technology, and require the and the of the cases with are to and the be that is a to the is to a relatively in which the of what has not In the to in a to the and it that the of various the not to a of technical as of the particularly the not be in a it of that a and it is not to the it is to the the public is not to while some are in and that are for as are by the that a of in the a of of NFTs that to the potential of copyright by the to the of the to for the an of a not in copyright is not to with copyright infringement in NFTs the are some tokens can be by the NFTs are and in to The can the also a in which the is NFT NFT The is not the NFT but the of to the by a to The also the the a and as a of the a to the and a to the is the a to the and a of the the be to for infringement it the NFT This that NFT regarding copyright infringement of as as a for and The is of the the in of the of and to the that has in a that copyright that rights of infringement in with the will and of infringement and will the and with to of copyright infringement be to of as as These to well, and copyright infringement are to analyse the potential by while to that be but at the to be by the by a for NFT at the of of the the with the is of NFT in a it to a will be of the and of the can be but of the cases has that of the of a which is of of the the the of has also the in to some of a to the and the the of a it the of the is to to the that NFT copyright will be dealt with at the article has analysed the copyright and NFTs from a legal perspective, some of the questions about the of tokens and in copyright of the of is to at NFTs from a perspective, it is not to some about the of technology, it copyright it of rights in the The of NFT copyright in the be that in some NFTs are with are as a to and at the of legal as copyright is the is that of potential copyright infringement in the NFT and from legal to the to The in is to with the for and In a it to by the of is the of of the is that of by non-fungible digital for The is that there is in are can a and can to but the NFT is as a of the that has by the in it NFTs are as of the and not of the there is ownership transfer in with a few a the for copyright is there to be a in some that an NFT is a digital to the an NFT is to a of a of the and not the at from the of the for some there are that is a of the copyright is as for the author it the the of of copyright can the of of the as to of The of of a has at the of the copyright of recent the of the of is only a at as an of the at copyright as potential to as a to the of the of is and can the of that the of a the of copyright as of an can NFTs in for the of the is that in the in NFTs is as to the by it has the the by an NFT is the NFT not as a to and the it as a that the can The is to for the the is for the and that can be copyright NFTs the it be to the public in a of NFTs to be in with copyright at from the of for the copyright are to be This is what is to in copyright as The of a can the and a in of the not use and of the in The are and for not which of the are as are there is also a non-fungible to copyright In some copyright as a of the of a by an author by the by the an by a These can be and the of the of copyright These also as non-fungible of the a a a

Lawrence J. Trautman

Fueled in part by the wealth recently created from digital currencies, major art dealers such as Christie’s and Sotheby’s have embraced the sale of non-fungible tokens attached to unique digital works of art. What are non-fungible tokens, how is this related to the blockchain and what do we know about this ancient market for digital art? It now appears that digital art can be added to the growing list of uses for blockchain technology now becoming a part of modern life. This article proceeds in seven parts. First, is a discussion about the new and explosive market for digital art. Second, I explore the evolution of the digital world and virtual property. Third, is an explanation and historical account of the blockchain and virtual currencies. Fourth, non-fungible tokens are discussed. Fifth, is a brief look at unresolved issues impacting the law of NFTs and potential solutions are provided. Sixth, a few thoughts about the future of digital property are presented. And last, I conclude. This dramatic extension of blockchain and other digital technology to the world of art and music represents a new and exciting platform for creative expression. This paper is a valuable addition to the literature by providing a readable introduction and overview of what is now known about the likely impact of blockchain technology and non-fungible tokens to music and art. This important development should have a significant impact on the future of innovation and property law.

George Milunovich

Major cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin and etherium rely on the computationally expensive and energy inefficient Proof of Work (PoW) consensus mechanism to validate transactions and secure their networks. In response to such concerns digital coins that implement more energy efficient algorithms, e.g. Proof of Stake (PoS), have started to grow in popularity and some PoW based coins are planning to switch to PoS. We investigate linkages and transmission of price shocks across fourteen PoW and PoS/Other powered digital assets. PoW cryptocurrencies appear to be more strongly connected within the network of digital coins than are PoS/Other digital currencies. On average PoW coins export more uncertainty to other cryptocurrencies, while assets in both groups import similar levels of risk. PoS/Other cryptocurrency stakeholders need to be aware of the impact that PoW cryptocurrencies can exert on the riskiness of their assets.

Panos Kudumakis, Thomas Wilmering, M. Sandler, Victor Rodrı́guez-Doncel · 6 authors

The Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) is an International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC) working group that develops media coding standards. These standards include a set of ontologies for the codification of intellectual property rights (IPR) information related to media. The Media Value Chain Ontology (MVCO) facilitates rights tracking for fair, timely, and transparent payment of royalties by capturing user roles and their permissible actions on a particular IP entity. The Audio Value Chain Ontology (AVCO) extends MVCO functionality related to the description of IP entities in the audio domain, e.g., multitrack audio and time segments. The Media Contract Ontology (MCO) facilitates the conversion of narrative contracts to digital ones. Furthermore, the axioms in these ontologies can drive the execution of rights-related workflows in controlled environments, e.g., blockchains, where transparency and interoperability is favored toward fair trade of music and media. Thus, the aim of this article is to create awareness of the MPEG IPR ontologies developed in the last few years and the work currently taking place addressing the challenge identified toward the execution of such ontologies as smart contracts on blockchain environments.

Rolf H. Weber

No abstract is available for this record.

João Marinotti

Property law has traditionally relied on tangible boundaries to delineate legal thinghood and to inform the bounds of in rem rights and duties. Unfortunately, property doctrines have fossilized around tangibility, causing fragmentation in the legal treatment of digital assets. In the United States, for example, cryptocurrencies and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) may simultaneously be classified as commodities, securities, currencies, assets, or not property at all, depending on the jurisdiction, domain, or specific asset in question. This fragmented system of overlapping legal treatments increases the information cost of using digital assets, decreases efficiency, and ultimately hinders future innovation.\nIn this Article, I propose a unified and tech-neutral approach to legal thinghood, providing a theoretically coherent and robust way to increase property law’s resilience in adapting to future technologies. Specifically, I deconstruct the conceptual purpose of tangibility in traditional doctrines of legal thinghood, uncovering its role as a technology (i.e., a tool) in property law to delineate rights. From this insight, I derive a coherent doctrinal test for distinguishing between digital assets that fulfill all conceptual requisites to be legal things and assets that do not. By doing so, I conclude that the traditional ontological categories of property law, such as choses in possession, are sufficiently robust to incorporate new and evolving digital assets. This tech-neutral approach paves the way toward an elegant and efficient legal treatment of digital assets and digital resource management in the twenty-first century.