Deng Jianpeng: Legal risks and regulations for intangible homogeneity

Author: Deng Jianpeng (Professor of Law School of Central University of Finance and Economics); Source: “Journal of Law” 2024, the 5th “Hot Perspective”

[Fund Project] This article is the phased research results of the “Central University of Finance and Economics” Digital Economy and Digital Governance “

Summary:Informalized tokens generally include tokens (carrier layers) issued by the blockchain and digital works (mapping layers), which are mapped. This structure allows the industry to mainly have the risk of financial law and intellectual property law.The risk is highly concentrated on the trading platform.In order to regulate the industry’s risks, regulators need to take the trading platform as the main regulatory goals.On the one hand, the platform operator, as the main body of both parties to regulate the transaction, focuses on the obligation to review the legitimacy of digital works; on the other hand, the regulatory agency uses the platform operator as the focus of regulation, guided by consumer rights and interests, and prevent the platform’s breeding of the platform’s breeding.Risk of financial legal system.

Keywords:Informalized token; legal risk; trading platform; blockchain; carrier layer; mapping layer

introduction

The intangible homogeneity of token refers to the technical standard protocol (such as ERC-721, etc.) based on the blockchain as the underlying technology, which usually follows the technical standard protocols such as Ethereum (such as ERC-721, etc.).As a data unit stored in the blockchain account book, the information recorded can be confirmed that the right to the mapping of digital works is attributed.Informalized inheritance in English is Non-FUNGIBLE token, referred to as NFT, which is translated as non-homogenized token in China, commonly known as digital collections.Fortune to protect property rights.[1] Since 2020, as a new thing that combines blockchain technology with digital content (picture, audio and video, etc.), the intangible homogeneous token has caused a huge response in the field of digital works, and even in some reconstruction of digital worksStructure of rights and obligations.

However, there are many legal risks in intangible homogeneity, especially for financial law and intellectual property protection.Mainstream research has entered relevant legal issues from perspectives such as copyright infringement or non -classification of legal attributes.Many research focuses on the application of blockchain technology in the field of copyright and the risk of copyright trading in the field of copyright; [2] Some research and discussing the responsibility of trading platforms in copyright infringement; [3] or with the perspective of rights bouquets, discuss intangible homogeneityThe legal attributes of Hua Tong Stock Exchange; [4] or analyzing the legal nature of non -homogenization and token under the technical environment of overseas public chain; [5] or actually analyze the legal nature of NFT digital works in the domestic alliance chain/private chain environment, the legal nature of NFT digital works transactions; [6] and so on.Foreign scholars are concerned about the problems in the field of copyright protection such as intangible homogeneity in online games. Some scholars believe that intangible homogeneous certificates have created a “programmable creative autonomy”, giving the author’s control of the author’s control of the work; [7] Some scholars believe that the principle of the right to use the right to apply for the non -homogeneous certification transaction of the work may not be able to apply the principle of the use of copyright law, resulting in the restrictions on the purchase of non -homogenization and token.[8] With the increase in the application scenarios of non -homogenization and token, the focus of legal research has shifted from copyright to a wider type of rights type and legal attributes.If some scholars have the theory of information theory of information theory, the theory of possession can become a private law foundation for protecting intangible property such as intangible homogeneity; [9] Some scholars demonstrate that the holder of the non -homogeneous forecast is owner rather than intellectual property rights being permitted by the permission of intellectual property rights.The law should protect this new type of ownership.[10]

However, domestic and foreign scholars have less research on comprehensive analysis and regulatory ideas of non -homogeneous certificates. In addition, only individual studies have cut in from the perspective of financial law.[11] Based on the achievements and shortcomings of predecessors, this article first analyzes the structure of non -homogenization and token;The trading platform is the appropriateness and advantage of the regulatory center; in order to explore the specific routes and limitations of the regulating trading platform; finally, the conclusion.

1. Structure and legal risks of intangible syndromes

(1) Double -layer structure of intangible homogeneity

Informalized token provides mainstream applications for the confirmation of digital works and transactions.The non-homogenization of the same data stored on the full data chain, such as the BRC-20s tokens, is directly recorded on the Bitcoin blockchain based on the ORDINALS protocol “inscription”.The “Cong” (tokens) of the digital works) achieved his sexual dominance and control.The non -homogenization and token on the Bitcoin blockchain is equivalent to confirming the prove that the receiver who owns the private key can control and access the genuine chain digital works.[12] As a more mainstream application, the digital works that are permanently mapped by the Ethereum are mostly stored outside the chain.Generally, the intangible syndrome is a double -layer structure, including the token (carrier layer) and the digital works (mapping layers) on the chain, and its rights structure involves the rights of the property rights and mapping digital works of the mapping layer.

First of all, under the technical environment of the public chain, the carrier layer has an irreplaceable physical attribute, and the exclusive control of the holder is realized through the key, which has the characteristics of property rights.The traditional property concept of property rights is challenged.Scholars even believe that this is an innovation of a subversive ownership model that allows valuable things to break away from the real object and define ownership.In the world of blockchain, once a kind of asset is created, only the owner has the right to dominate, and people do not have to worry about the security of the transaction process. As long as it has sufficient network consensus, it will not be easily copied.[13] However, mainstream papers analyze the legal attributes of non -homogenization and token, such as “theory of network virtual property”, “property rights theory”, “claimal theory”, “property interest theory”, etc. [14]The layers were mixed, ignoring the difference between the two.Some scholars believe that the core element of the NFT function is equivalent to the objects of the matter is its disposableness at the static level and the dynamic level of publicity. The right holder can achieve effective control of NFT through digital signature technology.[15] This discussion is only the carrier layer.Especially in the domestic alliance chain or private chain technology environment, once the operating entity shut down network services (such as Tencent Phantom nuclear project), the NFT digital collection is risk of loss.Some scholars believe that the consequences of NFT digital works for continuous technical services for network operators are “creditor’s rights”.[16] However, in the technical environment of the public chain, digital works that are mapping of the intangible and syndromes are directly stored in the blockchain, such as NFT based on the Bitcoin Ordinals protocol, or Ethereum NFT with ENS domain data, orThe mapping digital works are stored in a decentralized server. The intangible homogeneous certificates do not rely on a clear third -party duration.Tongtong syndrome is characterized by the (carrier layer and mapping layer) as a “creditor certificate”, because it is not sufficient.

The “Service Agreement” of OPENSEA, a representative platform for overseas industry, said that OpenSea is not an encrypted digital token wallet provider, exchange, broker, dealer, financial institution or payment processing institution, etcThe NFT issued on the previously, NFT, who does not control or controls the interaction with users, does not perform NFT purchases, transfer or sales; users must use third -party wallets to use third -party wallets for user chain transactions; wallets cannot operate, maintain or maintain or maintainAffiliated, OpenSea has no control over the content of the user’s wallet and cannot be retrieved or transferred to its content.[17] In the above -mentioned technical environment, users have exclusive dominance rights to the non -exemplary and generalization of the purchase of the platform, and the platform will not be responsible for any behavior or no behavior of any behavior or the leakage of the user’s account or wallet.Therefore, combined with the technical characteristics of the non -homogeneous transportation of the public chain and the agreement of the platform, the follow -up resale of such NFT digital works as a debt transfer behavior may be difficult to establish.Under the technical environment of the alliance chain or private chain, the non -homogeneous passage purchased by the user on the platform is generally stored in the accounts opened by the platform. These intra -mass token data and accounts are mostly controlled by the platform.Users cannot transfer non -homogenization to other accounts controlled by the platform, and the transfer of non -homogenization forces between different accounts in the platform is also strictly limited by the platform.[18] The non -homogeneous certificates purchased by users on this type of platform requires third parties to bear the obligation to pay (such as continuous technical services of network operators), which has obvious contract counterparts.On an overseas platform, which is represented by OpenSea, the user’s non -homogenized token is stored in an account (commonly known as wallet) independent of the platform, and the user implements his governance, which is more materialist in form.

Secondly, the ownership of the right to the mapping layer in the mapping layer, in accordance with Article 20 of the Copyright Law of the People’s Republic of China: “The transfer of the original ownership of the work does not change the ownership of the copyright of the work, but the exhibition of the original art and photography works exhibitionsThe right of the original right enjoys the “intra” the “intangible homogeneous token transaction will generate property rights (carrier layers) transfer (the smart contract address change), but it does not necessarily change the ownership of the copyright (mapping layer).The holder has the private key and controls the token (carrier layer). It does not be given the power controlled by the digital works of the mapping layer, and it cannot prohibit others from accessing the access of digital works.In addition to the transaction rules of non -homogenization of “casting” and the issuer’s transaction rules, the transfer of copyright is clearly stipulated, otherwise the copyright of the mapping layer digital works does not necessarily be transferred.Therefore, similar to the physical work, the purchase of non -homogeneous token does not necessarily legalize the copyright of digital works at the same time.As described by the scholars, the non -homogeneous certification transaction involves the change of the holder of the metadata of digital works, not the change of the original or copy ownership of the work.The right of copying parts, but the only logo code for buyers holding the work has nothing to do with copyrights.[19] When the buyer did not obtain the explicit statement of the issuer’s transfer of copyright, he only obtained the rights of non -homogenized generalization (carrier layer) and the right to access genuine digital works (mapping layer).

(2) Legal risks of intangible homogeneity

The “carrier layer” of intangible homogeneity and token mainly has the risk of financial law, and the “mapping layer” mainly has intellectual property risks.The “carrier layer” of intangible homogeneous and token is based on the blockchain technology, which can facilitate transactions and circulation in the encrypted asset trading platform. It has the characteristics of premium, monetization and volatility in transactions.Financial attributes and related risks.If some scholars believe that because it is based on the blockchain, the development of NFT and its role in the financial system have an inseparable relationship with the digital world.[20] The risks of intangible homogeneity to the financial law mainly include violation of financial regulatory regulations (policies) and suspected financial crimes.Since its emergence in blockchain technology in 2009, the mainstream application is the issuance, transactions, circulation, confirmation, and blockchain finance of private encryption assets (such as encrypted asset exchanges, decentralized borrowing and stable coins).Risk is endless.[21] Breeding chaos such as illegal fundraising, money laundering, fraud and MLM, and departing from financial legal system and regulatory policies.Relying on the blockchain of intangible homogeneous certification, it is essentially one of the types of encrypted assets. With the help of the tokens, the encrypted assets are allowed to be exposed and convenient to the chain in a wider range of buyers.Informalized token has a higher liquidity, and its mapping digital works meet the needs of a wider audience.Digital works may not have the effect of investment income and asset allocation, but it is inevitable that the platform has used the blessing of blockchain and crypto assets to exaggerate its potential appreciation expectations and become the main source of the risk of financial law.

Some scholars believe that NFT may be laundering as a new type of money laundering model to form a chaotic first and secondary market.Many consumers have speculated NFT as financial investment products.[22] my country’s financial regulatory authorities have explicitly banned transactions from virtual currencies (encrypted assets), but the attitude of digital asset policies with financial attributes such as non -homogeneity and certificates is not clear.The Yuan universe boom set off in 2021 is inseparable from the hype of the capital market. Criminals use the concepts of the Yuan universe and non -homogenization tos for fraud.[23] According to statistics, in 2022, the total global transaction volume of non -homogeneity and token was 55.5 billion US dollars, of which 46%of the transaction volume was suspected of speculation and knocking, and there was the risk of illegal financial activities.[24] Therefore, in April 2022, the China Internet Finance Association and other institutions jointly issued the “Initiative on Preventing NFT -related Financial Risks”, pointing out that NFT has hidden dangers such as hype, money laundering, illegal financial activities, etc., and advocates intangible syndrome tokensDevelop financial development.[25]

In addition, the contents of the intangible syndromes of the mounting layer naturally involve intellectual property issues.In most cases, the hash values of digital works that are maximized by non -homogeneous patent certificates instead of the work recorded on the blockchain, which can be effective in registering the work, but the blockchain itself cannot identify the mapping layer digital works legal.Sexuality and originality. At the same time, the blockchain technology itself cannot identify the identity and distinguish between different digital works to the project party, which makes it easy for some hot projects to be imitated.For example, domestic people in China use the NFT pony series created by foreign artist Maya Delia to release similar projects on a platform, and the details of the two are almost consistent.[26] The non -homogenization of the professor created by a professor of an art college was accused of plagiarizing the popular foreign project “boring ape” (Bayc).[27] American artist Mason Rothschild uses a series of non -homogenization of the luxury company Hermes “Birkin” series products as a prototype, casting a series of non -homogenization of “Meta Birkin” to infringe on Hermes’ trademark rights.[28] The market is full of illegal incidents such as piracy and plagiarism. Many projects are mixed with fish eyes and infringe on consumer rights.Without the permission of the original right holder, some project parties “casting” and issuance of non -homogeneous certificates for specific works have become common forms of low -cost infringement behaviors in the industry at the moment.The project party even repeatedly issued non -homogenization to the specific work “casting”. There are flaws in the relevant rights of intangible homogeneity and token, and the value is reduced by improper damage.Therefore, there are a large number of intellectual property infringement in the field of intangible homogeneous and token, impacting the legitimacy of property rights.

2. The necessity of the platform as a regulatory center

)

As a type of virtual commodity, the intangible homogeneity and token mainly depend on domestic and foreign trading platforms to complete marketing, promotion and trading.Most domestic trading platforms integrate “power”, issuance, transaction and pricing, such as “casting, distribution, transactions and pricing. Foreign representative platforms such as Opensea have” power “of promotion and sales of non -homogenization of non -homogenization.It has huge traffic in the industry. Therefore, the risk of the aforementioned financial legal system is mostly directly related to platform operators.During the investigation, the author found that some platforms have suspected illegal fundraising, MLM or fraud; some platforms are unknown, which can easily lead to consumers’ rights to defend their rights;Due to the general lack of effective external legal supervision, the number of non -homogenization and tokens issued by the alliance chain is hidden in a large number of dark box operations and inside story transactions.Informalized token is non -standardized virtual assets, and the fair value is difficult to determine, bringing a lot of room for the manipulation of the platform or some project parties.The founders or employees of some platforms hold part of the intangible homogeneity, strictly control the sales progress of the launch platform, artificially create scarce illusion, or use information advantages to participate in buying and selling in advance.Under the premise of lack of effective external regulation, transactions may be jointly manipulated by the project party and platform operators, or exclusively manipulated by the operator, and the implementation of fraud, insider transactions or raising price shipments.In June 2022, the federal prosecutor of the southern district of New York in the United States accused the former product manager of OpenSea Nathaniel Chastain’s participation in the insider trading of the non -quality token, which constituted the crime of Wire Fraud and money laundering.[29] Some project parties have increased their shipments through early hoarding of intangible homogeneity, which seriously endangers market fairness and infringes the right to buyers’ knowledge and property rights.Some platforms combine the “dealers” to lift (or suppress) a specific non -homogenized token price.Some platforms have not strictly verified the real names of users, and induced non -quality and token transactions in disguise into a criminal channel for money laundering.Scholars believe that under the premise of incomplete legal system, in order to obtain the maximum benefits, some merchants may use information differences formed by technological advantages to avoid supervision.[30] Some platforms will be fired from pusher to sky -high prices to the price of non -homogenization of fair value, allowing consumers who lack risk awareness may be suspected of fraud.With the development of the latest technological development of blockchain, some platforms have promoted the equity share of equity and interests of intangible homogeneity.

The emergence of legal property -related legal issues is mainly due to the lack of compliance of trading platforms. The review of the digital content of the non -homogeneous certificates of the project party is not strict, or even no review, or the identity recognition of the project party’s person in charge of the person in charge of the project party.Objectively inducing illegal people around the world to steal other people’s works at low cost, and “cast” inheritance of “casting” intangible homogeneity to sell, resulting in flaws of intellectual property rights mapped.Scholars believe that the intangible and generalized transaction model makes each digital file have a unique mark. Each copy of a digital work is replaced by a series of unique metadata, which produces “quasi -shaped” “Uniqueness “and” scarcity “effects.[31] However, in the research and practice, the author found that representative platforms such as OpenSea and other representative platforms actually adopted a negative review mechanism on the “casting” distribution.Technical examination on similarity of digital works.The platform’s “User Agreement” stipulates: Opensea will not declare or guarantee any statement or guarantee of third -party NFT content; users have the responsibility to verify the legality and authenticity of the NFT purchased from third -party sellers; OpenSea cannot guarantee that any NFT is always visible and//It may be available to buy, sell or transfer; users should be responsible for any content related to NFT.[32] The platform is unilaterally exempted from its own responsibilities, and the digital content of the digital content as others (such as the operator in the platform) is similar or even the same digital content.The main reason for the high incidence of property rights in the industry.

(2) The appropriateness and basis for the platform as the regulatory center

In summary, the legal risks of intangible homogeneity are directly related to the trading platform, and it is imminent to regulate its risks in a timely manner.There are two main operating modes of the trading platform, one is that the platform only provides technical auxiliary services (such as OpenSea) that provides the on -chain “casting” intangible homogeneous and token;Both are controlled by the platform (such as most domestic platforms). These platforms have dominant power such as the first issuance, selling frequency, pricing strategy, metadata storage method, and whether the secondary transactions are opened.When studying the Yuan universe, it was proposed that it is difficult to prevent and resolve risks by relying on the power of market entities. Even the profit -seeking trend of market entities will increase the probability of these risks, making the market forces itself the cause of these risks.Therefore, it is necessary to prevent and resolve risks through the power of administrative regulations.[33] For this reason, the trading platform is a qualified regulatory center, which mainly involves two levels: on the one hand, the platform operator, as the main body of both parties (operators and consumers in the platform), supervises its implementation as aThe main responsibility of the Internet platform, through the platform operators regulate the illegal acts of operators in the platform (mainly the risk of intellectual property infringement); on the other hand, the regulatory agency strikes the platform operator’s own illegal acts (mainly financial law risks) to promote the promotionThe platform operator assumes the legal responsibility.As stated by the scholars, the effective management of platform operators for the order of transactions in the platform is the guarantee of the healthy development of transactions. Platform operators may take unfair behaviors to harm the rights and interests of operators and consumers in the platform.[34] Therefore, the platform needs to be regulated and regulated at the above two levels.

Some scholars believe that the issuance of intangible homogeneous and general certificates is more casual. The issuer no longer assumes any obligations after the issuance. Theoretically, it may choose to go back to the anonymous issuance method of specific individuals or organizations in the real world.With the qualifications of legal subjects, there is no need to have “debtors” with legal subject qualifications.[35] However, most domestic intangible homogeneous certificates have been issued and traded through centralized platforms “casting”, and trading platforms are responsible and capable of verifying the identity of “casters” (mostly the platform operators in the platform).The domestic digital collection platform relies on the alliance chain or private chain. It has obvious centralized subject control characteristics.Some scholars believe that the vast majority of NFT platforms provide paid services. Economic benefits are directly obtained in NFT works. They should have high attention obligations.The various risk warning clauses are “checked” and do not have the legal effect of a third person.[36] In addition, the chain transaction in the public chain environment is only relatively anonymous. In recent years, the case of China -US law enforcement agencies has explained that through advanced technology analysis, law enforcement agencies may trace illegal acts on the chain to a specific individual or organization in the real world.Therefore, the identity of the issuer of the intangible homogeneity can basically be traced and clarified, and then it assumes the corresponding legal responsibility.

The problem of network platform regulation is that the dynamic development of the platform makes the legislation cannot keep up with the iterative update speed of the business model.[37] The rapid development of technological development in the field of intangible homogeneity, and should not excessively pursue the thinking programs of “all things” and “legal universalism” in response to legal risks. [38] should consider more effective regulatory channels.Most domestic platforms provide various services for issuers and consumers, integrating technical service providers, sellers, metadata storage, custodian, self -discipline supervisor, etc.EssenceHowever, some scholars point out that the stronger the platform power, the greater the possibility of abuse of private power.The abuse of privacy of the platform may be unscrupulous, and it is difficult to effectively respond to market competition and industry self -discipline alone. This will cause the publicity of the platform to be unable to achieve well. It must seek reasonable ways to regulate.[39]

Platform operators are united in one, and they may abuse their private power or deliberately reduce their obligations.For example, the “Ant Chain Digital Collection Platform User Service Agreement” (version 20230215) stipulates: According to relevant laws and regulations, any users who have passed, posting, publishing, or any other ways transmitted by the whale probe platform areNames, trademarks, service signs, brands, company marks, video, audio, or other information are responsible for content providers. The platform does not guarantee the correctness, integrity or quality of the content.[40] According to Article 41 of the E -Commerce Law, operators of e -commerce platforms shall establish an intellectual property protection rules, strengthen cooperation with intellectual property right holders, and protect intellectual property in accordance with the law.The above format clauses are equivalent to improving the risk recognition obligations and responsibilities in the fields of intellectual property rights in the consumer, and almost exempt all their responsibilities.Some platform self -discipline management rules show that operators have neglected their obligations to fulfill their attention and laisted part of infringement and breach of contract.Some scholars believe that the laws and regulations of the “Civil Code” stipulate that the platform operators have the obligation to prevent and stop infringement, otherwise they should bear the responsibility of helping infringement.Platform operators should assume substantial review duties to infringe intellectual property rights in the platform.[41] The platform as a regulatory center from two levels is the key to promoting the healthy development of the industry.

According to the provisions of Article 3, 30, and 52 of the “Measures for the Supervision and Administration of Online Transaction”, online trading operators should conscientiously fulfill their legal obligations and actively take the main responsibility;Or the platform service agreement and trading rules take warnings, suspension or termination services such as illegal acts on the platform; if the online trading platform operator does not take necessary measures, it shall assume joint responsibility with the operator in the platform in accordance with the law.The “E -commerce Law” requires the platform to formulate reasonable trading rules, credit evaluation rules and intellectual property protection rules.In summary, there is sufficient legal basis for the inheritance of the non -homogeneous token trading platform to bear the main responsibility.

(3) The platform as the advantage of the regulatory center

Platform operators have played a dominant role in various social functions, and they can be called the “third department” outside the government.[42] The intangible homogeneous certification trading platform is a digital organization supported by emerging technologies such as blockchain, big data, and artificial intelligence. It undertakes the public functions of organizing token issuance, maintaining the order of the trading market, and protecting user rights.It has obvious publicity.As one of the “digital seeers”, the intangible homogeneous traffic trading platform has the power to formulate trading rules, content audit and processing platforms in the platform, and even violate the law.Compared with regulatory and law enforcement subjects, the platform operator controls the entire transaction process, and the governance distance of illegal or crimes on the platform’s operators in the platform is closer.User behavior portraits have more regulatory capabilities and regulation advantages.This kind of private platform integrates a variety of “power” and actually undertakes the functions of a quantitative regulatory agency for regulating micro -market trading behaviors.As described by scholars, the platform is not only a market player involved in market competition, but also a regulatory subject for illegal and illegal behaviors within the regulating platform.[43] Compared with regulatory agencies, the platform is more likely to discover industry risks and be able to respond and solve disputes and prevent legal risks in time.Full process regulation.Some scholars believe that platform supervision has formed a dual regulatory system that coexist with private supervision and public supervision. The interior of the platform is mainly private supervision, the platform is mainly public supervision, and in general, the main role of the platform is mainly based on private supervision.[44] Under regulatory rights, it means that the platform has become the government’s “collaborative supervisor”. This kind of public -private cooperation plan can make full use of the technology and information advantages of the trading platform, effectively regulate the trading market, realize the government and platform collaborative supervision, and greatly improveThe efficiency of market supervision.

3. Specific ways to regulate trading platforms

(1) Platform responsibility and intellectual property risk regulation

Some scholars believe that emphasizing the implementation of the main responsibility of the platform is actually requiring the platform to strengthen self -regulation.[45] According to Article 2 of the E -commerce Law, e -commerce refers to business activities that sell products or provide services through information networks such as the Internet.The non -homogeneous token trading platform sells virtual commodities through Internet channels and should be regulated by the E -commerce Law.In addition, referring to the “Internet Platform Classification Tie Guide (Draft for Soliciting Opinions)” and “Draft for Consultation of the Internet Platform” and “Draft for Opinions), which was published in 2021,”Sales platforms, connecting people and virtual commodities, the main functions include providing sales services, promoting the transactions of both parties, and improving matching efficiency. At the same time, there are some financial service platform colors, connecting people and funds, including (dependence on third parties) to provide payment settlement for payment settlementFunction.The “Internet Platform Implementation of the main responsibility guide (draft for comments)” requires the platform to engage in business activities “must safeguard national interests and social public interests”, “establishing an internal supervision and inspection system”, and “undertaking corresponding security obligations.”In summary, the legal liability of Internet trading platforms usually include maintaining fair competition, online transaction security and risk prevention and control, traders’ identity information verification, platform content management and legality review, establishing fair service agreement and trading rules, natural person privacy and privacy and privacyInformation protection, the protection of operators and consumer rights in the platform.[46] However, given the particularity of the non -quality and certification industry, the construction of the responsibility of trading platforms focuses on regulating the risks of intellectual property rights and financial laws.

As mentioned earlier, the illegal acts of operators on the platform are mainly related to intellectual property infringement, which may cause major interest damage to consumers or third parties.The platform dominates the non -homogeneous token market, protects consumers’ rights, and assumes the responsibility of the market “watchman”. This requires that the trading platform should adopt technical testing methods such as artificial intelligence to actively prevent and eliminate the internal legal risks of the above platform.The review mechanism, communication processing mechanism, infringement complaint mechanism and post -after -dispute resolution mechanism are the basic ways to bear the aforementioned responsibility.In the early stage, the platform operator has basic review obligations such as qualification review and identity authentication of the project party. It can require the project party to provide a certain deposit, prepare documents such as copyright certificates for uploading digital works to be cast, and fully review the original knowledgeThe authorization of property rights rights is required to disclose whether it is exclusively authorized to ensure the right to consumers’ knowledge.The platform requires the issuer to upload the corresponding rights proof, including copyright certificates, authorization documents, license documents, trademark certificates, etc., to avoid unnecessary disputes and legal risks.If some scholars point out that the platform (joint issuer) provides consumers with the necessary information such as the original author, castor (publisher) and the number of releases of the original author of the digital works.[47] In practice, in the domestic “NFT case” around the “fat tiger vaccine”, the Hangzhou Internet Court believes that the platform must fulfill the responsibility of general network service providers (the “notice -deletion” obligation).The property right review mechanism is reviewed in advance of NFT’s copyright.[48] Article 1195 of the Civil Code and Article 45 of the E -Commerce Law stipulates that when the operator of the e -commerce platform knows or should know that the operator on the platform infringe intellectual property rights, it shall be deleted, blocked, blocked, brokenEssential measures such as opening links, termination of transactions and services, otherwise the platform and the infringer shall bear joint responsibility.To this end, the platform operator should set relevant clauses in the user agreement to clarify the border between the rights and obligations of all parties, the exemption situation and the right to recovery, and to avoid the infringement of intellectual property rights of the issuer.The platform can also strengthen the legality of copyright before the chain of the work can be strengthened through technical means.

According to the status of the market regulatory agency and legislative agencies, according to the status of the platform, comprehensively considering various factors such as user rights, platform regulatory capabilities and regulatory costs, the platform responsibility is scientifically and reasonably set.In practice, the platform’s diverse business model makes its role positioning more vague, and the boundaries of responsibility are unclear.Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish the type of platform operation, divide different subject responsibilities for different types of trading platforms, realize refined governance, and set corresponding attention obligations according to the types of different platforms.[49] For a platform that provides only non -homogeneous token transactions, in addition to fulfilling the obligations of the “Notice -Delete”, it shall also bear the responsibility of reviewing the legitimacy of the digital content beforehand.For a platform that provides various services such as non -homogeneous certification, launching, transactions or auctions, in addition to the aforementioned responsibility, it should also optimize the consultation mechanism of obtaining the stage of authorization of the copyright ownerThe scarcity of non -homogenization and token to avoid affecting consumer property rights.As far as the type of rights object is concerned, in the process of reviewing beforehand, the platform can transfer the ownership and copyright of the mapping layer digital work according to whether the transaction agreed, as well as the specific rights and uses of copyright business licenses.The type of rights of the layer and reviewing the corresponding authorization permit proves to ensure that the “castor” has the complete authorization of the above copyright owner to ensure long -term storage of non -homogeneous and related data to ensure consumer rights.

In the middle of the matter, in accordance with Article 1195 of the Civil Code and Article 23 of the Protection of Information Network Communication Rights, whether the platform operator shall review whether the user who applys for non -homogenization and token casting has provided the contribution of intellectual property drafts and originals.Preliminary evidence such as legal publication, copyright registration certificate, certification issued by certification agencies, and the authenticity of such evidence prove that it is authorized by the real right holder or the original right holder.In the process of non -homogenization, publicity, publicity, sale, and resale process, if infringement occurs, the platform can increase the review dimension, suspend the sale and circulation, and issue public statements.Platform or industry associations can also formulate rules in the future. Within the framework of the law, according to factors such as the review needs of different scenarios and the types of intellectual property rights, it is clear and detailed.In the post -after -post, when the operators in the platform have infringement and fraud, the platform operator should remove the intangible homogeneity to the first time to fulfill the necessary measures, such as the obligation of “notification -deletion” to the infringing work will be the infringing work.The blockchain is disconnected and the address black holes are disconnected to stop infringement; when fraud involving fraud, it can freeze the security deposit of the project party and fulfill subsequent compensation liability.The platform or industry association self -built dispute settlement mechanism. Consumers will handle disputes to the platform first. When the platform’s handling is unconvinced, the intervention of non -homogeneous notification disputes organized by the industry association or local financial supervision and administration bureausEssenceIn addition, the judicial organs rationally define the legal responsibility of the platform in the specific case, improve the postkeeping mechanism after the incident, and provide a demonstration role in the industry.For example, the Hangzhou Internet Court pointed out in the referee document in the “Fat Tiger Vaccine” case that the platform should be infringed due to the lack of prudential obligations and the issuance of non -homogenization of the issuance, and it shall bear joint legal liability.[50]

(2) Platform responsibility and financial risk regulations

The current regulatory principles need to be further optimized. Supervisors need to recognize the important value of non -quality token in the digital art, culture and business fields, scientifically and reasonably set up the principles of supervision, focus on preventing the risks of financial legal system breeding platforms, and promote platform operatorsProtect consumer rights.Regulatory agencies are committed to balanced innovation and regulatory relationships, and promoting risk governance and encouragement development.We look forward to innovation and must be alert to the accidents of innovation.Cutting -edge technology contains risks, and at the same time has great positive value for society, and be alert to simply adopting the “one -size -fits -all” policy.Blockchain supervision policies, including non -qualitatively tokens, should not adhere to the “ban” model for a long time.[51] A healthy market regulatory path should not be limited to setting the “zero risk” regulatory goals.In the development of NFT, its attributes should not be identified by “all or all”, but the possibility of diversification should be allowed to find a balance in protecting the interests of private property and preventing public financial risks.[52] Under the bottom line of adhering to financial security, properly liberalizing the financial degree of non -exemplary and general certification is conducive to the deep use of the globalization of globalization of the “construction of the Yuan universe”.A good interaction was formed in the global financial governance process.[53] Other scholars believe that NFT is the core asset of DEFI (blockchain decentralization finance). For its financial functions, it should guide them to play reasonably within a certain range, rather than banned it.Under the influence of my country’s policy, users must not be transferred again after the platform’s first transaction, affecting the value storage function and circulation function of NFT.While preventing its securitization, it should be given free flow between specific subjects, allowing NFT secondary transactions and even multiple transactions.[54]

From the perspective of the author’s practical survey, the financial risks of the industry in recent years are mainly derived from platform operators themselves.The author recommends setting a trading platform with the protection of consumer rights and interests as its core.In order to prevent financial risks such as money laundering, fraud, MLM, insider trading and illegal fundraising, regulators take the trading platform as the key regulation objects, and require that they have established a trader identity identification mechanism and anti -money laundering mechanism in accordanceIllegal acts.Therefore, intangible homogeneous certificates must be compliant, that is, the platform is required to conduct real -name reviews of users, store the necessary non -homogenized traffic transaction records, and fulfill the obligation of anti -money laundering.[55]

The combination of intangible homogeneity and digital works has the attributes of virtual commodities, and it is inevitable that there is an investment nature.The non -homogeneous and certified buyers are mostly novice in the industry. Some newly admitted consumers are affected by the promotion of trading platforms and the promotion of industry boom, and only pay attention to its price rise and fall.The non -homogenization of token involves a more complex rights structure. The trading rules of different platforms are very different from the authorization clauses. Ordinary consumers have the ability to distinguish the content of the rights structure of the non -homogeneous certificate.The important connotation of attributes or its significance in history, as well as the distribution of platforms and its own responsibility.To measure the value of non -homogenization and tokens, buyers need to pay attention to what rights to enjoy the number of digital works that are mapping of informal certification, evaluate the deviation of its inherent value and market price, and judge its content scarcity and art.The degree of originality.Some scholars believe that NFT is only a token ID, only a specific mark or mapping function, and there is no appreciation value.A large number of digital works are stored under the chain, which is easily tampered with.It can be considered that the price fluctuation of NFT digital works is higher than that of ordinary debt.If the public has this cognition and risk awareness of NFT digital works, he will stay away from irrational investment behavior.[56]

For most consumers, the popularization of basic knowledge and financial risk education in the industry is extremely important.The original copyright owner of the digital work may grant some of the property rights of part of the work of non -homogenization and token, but the copyright is a “right to the right” and involves more than 10 specific rights.Aiming at the transfer clauses of various types of intangible certification rights, the content of the property rights or other rights that the buyer is permitted to be transferred may be very different.Some scholars believe that it is difficult for NFT digital works to say how much use value is.At present, the “casting” is basically artistic works. The value is not practicality, or even mainly for appreciation, but in the market appreciation expectations and monetization of scarcity.[57] This is mainly for the status quo of some domestic non -classification of token.Looking at at home and abroad, there is diversity of value of non -homogeneous certificates.The aforementioned “casting” such as exchanging media, event tickets, and business cards allowed to enter the party as a non -homogeneous token, which has certain practicality.In addition, Yuga Labs, a well -known intangible and foothold project, “Boring Ape”, awarded the “boring ape” digital works purchased by buyers, and the right to use the derivatives based on the creation of the artwork, such as productionAnd sell T -shirts that show art works, as well as the rights of third -party websites or applications that own or operate “boring apes”, and so on.[58] The “boring ape” holder can also participate in a specific party to obtain the rights and interests of the virtual plot of the airdrop at the universe.

Different from this kind of extensive authorization, such as JD.com in December 2021 in the blockchain (“Zhizhen Chain”) when selling non -homogenization to the “59], the original right holder of the domestic intangible and token is oftenOnly authorized buyers to enjoy limited rights to access specific digital works.The protocols of other platforms are similar. For example, the “NFTCN Platform Service Agreement” stipulates that after the transaction is completed, the user will enjoy the right to possess, use, transfer, and punish the digital work.The owner of property rights; the intellectual property rights of digital works are not transferred or shared due to the trading behavior of digital works.[60]

The rights of this type of intangible token to buyers are mainly limited to accessing limited rights such as digital works and non -commercial exhibitions.Affected by the aforementioned non -homogenized and generalized rights structure characteristics, the buyer usually obtains a virtual equity voucher under the public chain environment, which has the right to discharge him and dominance to the carrier layer.According to the above -mentioned domestic platforms, in the private chain or alliance chain environment, the buyer has not obtained the exclusive right to the carrier layer, and it is not necessary to obtain the copyright of the mapping layer digital works.At this time, the “ownership” of the buyer obtained digital works is likely to be a fictional legal imagination.

In addition, the original copyright owner may repeat the “casting” and selling the same number of works on the basis of different trading platforms on the basis of not violating the user agreement.This will bring two problems. First, non -homogenization and token have been cast and sold on different platforms, which greatly dilutes its market price, and negatively affects the expectations of buyers’ property rights or future investment benefits.Some buyers do not understand the complicated right structure of non -homogenization and token, have no time to read or understand trading rules and authorization clauses, and engage in commercial development and digital works related to digital works after purchasing non -homogenization.Use, causing breach of contract and infringement.Informalized token can be used as a proof of appreciation of genuine digital works, and in digital works transactions, it can be used as a limited copyright or ownership certificate.However, this right proves that the digital works mapped by non -homogenization and tokens are genuine works, and buyers have obtained the qualifications to access genuine digital works.These complex rights structures and theoretical knowledge of law often exceed the understanding of most ordinary consumers.The author recommends that the market regulatory agency promotes the continuous prompt risk of trading platforms, promotes platforms for the popularization of industry knowledge and investment risk education for consumers.Protect its rights and interests.Regulatory agencies can further promote the popularization of relevant legal knowledge on the platform, carry out legal risk education, eliminate the cognitive differences or misunderstandings of ordinary buyers, and help ordinary buyers understand the right to be non -homogenized and token.Loss, avoid investment risk.

Some scholars advocate that such as the intangible nature of the financial transaction, the informationization of the transaction content, and the high persuasion of the sales method, etc., financial consumers are more weak than ordinary consumers, and have special protection for financial consumers.[61] In the field of non -homogenization, consumers are generally difficult to understand that non -homogenization and complicated technical architecture, rights structure and transfer contracts, in the face of advertising promotion and investment advisory expressions of trading platforms, And do not have the ability to bargain accordingly.Consumers have made irrational purchase impulses by multiple disadvantages in transactions, and even affected by various persuasion and propaganda.The legal and regulatory system should ensure the symmetry of information and allow consumers to obtain all available information. Based on the target of consumer rights and interests, it opens up the “casting”, issuance, promotion, transaction, and dispute resolution of intangible homogeneous token products.The chain integrates the specific rules of the regulatory agency regulatory platform.This includes the detailed description of the project party to provide the project party to provide a detailed description of each project and show the potential consumers on the platform, such as the connotation, innovation, and number of issuance of the number of digital works mapping of intangible homogeneity.The risk of hype of the Huatong Stock Exchange may lead to a narrative of the content of consumer property rights and interests.By strengthening the obligation of the trading platform, the regulatory agency requires the trading platform to bear the responsibility of improper advice.

Finally, considering that consumers are mostly in a weak position in the process of purchasing and investing non -homogenization, the author recommends that on the one hand, regulators can set up consumer complaints and feedback mechanisms for financial risks of the industry.Illegal acts such as dark box operations and insider trading; on the other hand, the review of platform self -discipline rules should be strengthened.Researchers believe that when the platform operators and platform operators, and consumers such as group self -discipline management and the rationality of specific management measures have arisen, the people’s court shall follow the format clauses in the “Civil Code” and other laws.Relevant regulations are to review its management basis, management measures and management procedures.[62] The formulation of self -discipline rules in the trading platform may have an equal negotiation appearance, but consumers and platform operators have basically do not have the right to speak for the rules, and usually can only obey the rules formulated unilaterally in the trading platform.Therefore, the trading platform enjoys the highest authority within it, but has no effective supervision.Faced with the aforementioned platform deliberately reducing its obligations and abuse of private power, the rules of self -discipline of the trading platform should be reviewed by judicial institutions in terms of the legitimate rights and interests of the economists and consumers in the platform.

Fourth, conclusion

The legal risks of intangible homogeneity are mostly related to the structural characteristics of the carrier layer and the mapping layer. The trading platform organization and promoting the circulation of non -homogenization of token, providing the technical environment for its rights structure and operation.Therefore, these risks focus on the trading platform.In view of the rapid development of the industry in the world, the regulatory agencies have limited supervision capabilities. In order to balance the needs of balanced innovation and control risks, regulators need to focus on platforms as the key regulation goals.On the one hand, the platform operator, as the main body of both parties to regulate transactions, focuses on the obligation to review the legitimacy of digital works to prevent intellectual property infringement; on the other hand, the regulatory agency lists the platform operators as the focus of regulation and protects consumer rights and interests.Guide to prevent illegal acts such as the risk of financial legal systems and cracking down on insider transactions.

Overall, the non -homogeneous token is still in the early stage of development, and market supervisors should urge platform operators to implement legal responsibility.On the one hand, the trading platform cannot deliberately reduce its own obligations, especially to avoid unilateral exemption from their own responsibilities, and even all the obligations of the risk identification of intellectual property in the field of intellectual property rights in consumers; on the other hand, the trading platform should be cautious and proclaimed.Disputes between the economists and consumers in an objective and fair position mediation platform.The judicial organs have conducted necessary reviews of the legitimacy of the platform’s self -regulations through iconic cases such as “fat tiger vaccine”. In the future, some cases can be selected to increase some cases into guiding cases. In the context of the corresponding vacancy of the corresponding legal supply system, it is for the temporary vacancies of the legal system.The interests and disputes in emerging areas provide effective demonstrations and guidance.Market supervisors and legislators take the platform as the center of regulatory centers to prevent financial risks and ensure consumer rights as the main line, and scientifically and reasonably set up the responsibility of platform operators.With the in -depth development of non -homogenization and token, the public effects of some head platforms will continue to expand.Market regulators and platforms deepen cooperation supervision, govern risks, and solve the problems brought by market failure, supervision failure, and gap.In the process, trading platforms and market regulatory agencies, as private forces, have become the main body of public responsibility, and this regulatory model will also provide full reference and beneficial inspiration for the legal risk prevention and control of other cutting -edge technology industries.

[1] Wang Qicai: “Theoretical Positioning and Basic Framework of the Governance of the Governance of the Universe”, “Chinese Law”, 2022, No. 6.

[2] Chu Meng, Yi Jiming: “NFT copyright work transaction: the way of legal risks and” breaking the situation “,” Friends of Editor “, No. 8, 2022; Tao Qian:” On the intangible homogeneous tokens on digital worksThe meaning of the law of transaction “, contains” Oriental Law “, No. 2, 2022.

[3] Wang Jiangqiao: “Copyright Protection and Platform Responsibility in the NFT transaction model”, “Financial Law”, No. 5, 2022.

[4] Ruan Shenyu: “On the property rights and interests of NFT digital assets: with the perspective of rights beam”, “Zhejiang Social Sciences”, No. 3, 2023.

[5] Su Yu: “Legal Nature and Risk Governance of Intangible Tolerance”, “Oriental Law” 2022, No. 2.

[6] Wang Qian: “The Legal Qualification of NFT Digital Works Transactions”, “Oriental Law” 2023, No. 1.

[7] Evans, Tonya M. Cryptokitties, Cryptography, and Copyright, AIPLA Quarterly Journal, Vol.47: ISS.2, August 2019, PP.219-26666.

[8] Fisher, K. On Time in NFT: Blockchain, Copyright, and the Right of First Sale Doctrine, Cardozo Arts & Amp; O.2, 2019, PP.629-634.

[9] Marinotti, JOAO, Possessing Intangibles, Northwestern University Law Review, VOL.116: No.5, 2022, PP.1227-1282.

[10] Fairfield, Joshua. Tokenized: The Law of Non-FUNGIBLE tokens and UNIQUE DIGITAL Property, Indiana Law Journal, VOL.97: ISS.4, PP.1261-1313.

[11] Wu Yikai: “Research and Supervision Construction of Non -homogenized and Table of Fortune in Financial Law”, contains “Shanghai Finance”, No. 11, 2022.

[12] Related example see https://ordinals.com/inscripting/e7454db518ca3910d2FL7F41C7B215D6CBA00F29BDL86AE77D7F0BA7C0ELI0, July 20, 2024.

[13] Changye, Liu Qiushan: “Yuan Cosmic”, CITIC Publishing House 2022 Edition, p. 139.

[14] Li Yizhu: “Research on the Legal Properties and Trading Relations of NFT Digital Works”, “Tsinghua Law”, No. 3, 2023.

[15] Guo Peng: “The legal qualitative of the NFT digital collection transactions under the principle of functional equivalent -the new path of the incorporation of virtual property is included in the adjustment of the property law”, which contains “Modern Law”, No. 6, 2023.

[16] Li Yizhu: “Research on the Legal Properties and Trading Relations of NFT Digital Works”, “Tsinghua Law”, No. 3, 2023.

[17] TerMSOFSERVICE, HTTPS: /opencea.io/TOS, visit date: April 4, 2023.

[18] For example, the “Ant Chain Digital Collection Platform User Service Agreement” (version 20230215) stipulates that: without the consent of the platform, users must not transfer the rights and obligations under the third parties;It should be understood and agreed that when the service is terminated, the NFTCN platform can permanently delete the data of users on the NFTCN platform from the server.

[19] Zhang Jinping: “The Challenge and Response of the Copy of Copyright and Law”, “Financial Law”, No. 5, 2022.

[20] Wu Yikai, Li Guoan, Wang Jianxuan: “Possibilities and Judicial Terminals of Intangible Tolerance”, “Journal of Guangdong University of Finance and Economics”, No. 3, 2023.

[21] Deng Jianpeng: “Law of the Blockchain: Questions and Path”, “Academic Forum”, No. 3, 2023.

[22] Wu Yikai: “Research and Supervision Construction of Non -homogenized and Table of Fortune in Financial Law”, contains “Shanghai Finance”, No. 11, 2022.

[23] Ouyang Rihui and Li Xiangyu: “Theoretical Mechanism and Evolution Logic of Yuanshi Finance”, “Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Philosophy Social Science Edition)”, No. 2, 2023.

[24] See Crypto Sete, 27 Stats About NFTS in 2022 — WHO Are the Big Winners? Https: //cryptoslate.com/27-About-NFTS-w222- / /Date of visit: March 22, 2023.

[25] See the China Internet Finance Association: “China Internet Finance Association, the China Banking Association and the China Securities Industry Association on the prevention of NFT -related financial risks”, https://www.nifa. Org.cn/nifa/2955675/2955763/3014136/Index. HTML, visit date: March 23, 2023.

[26] Did you have been cut by NFT by NFT?”, Https://www. Sohu.com/a/530814469_121194864, visit date: August 5, 2024.

[27] “Yang Mei Teacher was accused of plagiarizing the” Boring Ape “, a number of experts: There are plagiarism imitation”, https://www.thepaper.cn/newsdetail_FOR-ward_16627715, visit date: May 1, 2023.

[28] Herèms International V, Rothschild, https://www.loeb, com/zh-hans/insights/publications/2023/02/Hermes -International -V -Rothschild: 202 August 1, 4th.

[29] EX-opensea manager ‘s trial begins in first alleged nft insider trading scheme, https: //gizmodo.com/opensea-nSider-trading -1850368156, visit date: May 16, 2023; Disgraced OpenSea Manager Arrted for Insider Trading, https: //www.theverge.com/2022/6/1/23150429/opencea-nSider-nathaniel-hastain-Rasted-H. OmePage-NFTS, visit date: May 202317th.

[30] Fang Huiying: “The Dohaies and Cracks of New Securities Market Crimes and Cracks”, published “Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law”, No. 1, 2022.

[31] Tao Qian: “The Law of the Anti -Homering tokenization of Digital Works”, “Oriental Law” 2022, No. 2, 2022.

[32] Terms of Service, https://opensea.io/tos, visit date: April 4, 2023.

[33] Huang Yan: “Administrative Regulatory Path of the Yuan Universe: A Framework Analysis”, “Chinese Law”, No. 6, 2022.

[34] Wu Teng: “Judicial Censorship of E -commerce Platform Self -Discipline Management Behavior”, “Journal of Jinan (Philosophy Social Science Edition)”, No. 10, 2023.

[35] Su Yu: “Legal and Risk Governance of Intangible Tolerance”, “Oriental Law” 2022, No. 2.

[36] Zhao Lei: “NFT’s Legal Regulations -Starting from the” Fat Tiger Vaccine Case “,” Law Application “, No. 11, 2023.

[37] Song Yahui: “The Theory of Dynamic Regulation of Network Platforms”, “Journal of Shanghai Political Sciences (Journal of the Law of the Law)”, No. 2, 2023.

[38] Deng Jianpeng: “Reason for the Code of the Chinese Civil Code”, “Journal of Nanchang University (Humanities and Social Science Edition)”, No. 3, 2019.

[39] Liu Quan, “The Publicity of the Network Platform and its realization -Judging from the perspective of the legal regulations of the e -commerce platform”, “Law Research”, 2020, No. 2, 2020.Other scholars have pointed out that the main management functions of the platform are formulated rules, distribution rights and obligations, and disputes.See Li Yiran: “Network Platform Governance: Self -Creation Students and its Operation Border”, Shanghai People’s Publishing House 2021, p. 15.

[40] “Ant Chain Digital Collection Platform User Service Agreement” (version 20230215) stipulates: Under any circumstances, the whale probe platform is not responsible for any content, including but not limited to any errors or omissions of any content, and published through this platform through this platform.Deatrom or damage derived.The “NFTCN Platform Service Agreement” also stipulates that the platform does not guarantee that the work uploaded by each user has the authorization of copyright or copyright owner. Users need to distinguish whether the works on the platform belong to the original work.The platform does not bear any responsibility due to the loss of the user’s purchase of the infringing works.

[41] Wu Teng: “Judicial Censorship of E -commerce Platform Self -Discipline Management Behavior”, “Journal of Jinan (Philosophy Social Science Edition)” 2023, No. 10.

[42] Li Yiran: “Network Platform Governance: Self -Creation Students and its Operation Boundary”, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2021, p. 69.

[43] Liu Quan: On the main responsibility of the Internet platform, “Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law”, No. 5, 2022.

[44] Li Yiran: “Network Platform Governance: Self -Creation Student and its Operation Boundary”, Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2021, p. 34.

[45] Liu Quan: On the main responsibility of the Internet platform, “Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law”, No. 5, 2022.

[46] For detailed discussions on the responsibilities and obligations related to the intangible homogeneous certification trading platform, see the editor -in -chief of Cheng Xiao: “Research on NFT Digital Arts Legal Issues”, China Legal Publishing House 2023 Edition, pp. 64-71.

[47] Wu Yikai: “Research and Supervision Construction of Non -homogenized and Table of Fortune in Financial Law”, “Shanghai Finance”, No. 11, 2022.

[48] See Hangzhou Internet Court (2022) Zhejiang 0192 Civil Judgment No. 1008.

[49] Si Xiao: “Setting of the Intellectual Property Pay attention obligations of online service providers”, “Legal Science (Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law)”, No. 1, 2018.

[50] See Hangzhou Internet Court (2022) Zhejiang 0192 Civil Judgment No. 1008.

[51] Deng Jianpeng and Ma Wenjie: “The Thinking and Optimization of the Rule of Law of the Rectification of Virtual Currency — Regulatory Supervision of the” Ban “of Financial Technology”, containing “Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Philosophy Social Science Edition)” 2022, 3rd, 3rd.Expect.

[52] Wu Yikai, Li Guoan, and Wang Jianxuan: “Possibly the Possibilities of the Financial Properties and Judicial Decision of Intangible Halgers”, “Journal of Guangdong University of Finance and Economics”, No. 3, 2023.

[53] Wu Yikai: “Research and Supervision Construction of Non -homogenized and Table of Frequitics in Financial Law”, “Shanghai Finance”, 2022, No. 11.

[54] Zhao Lei: “NFT’s Legal Regulations -Starting from the” Fat Tiger Vaccine Case “,” Law Application “, No. 11, 2023.

[55] Li Jing: “The Governance Model of the Aquarium of the Universe: Self -Live Governance, Cooperation Governance and Functional Supervision”, “Electronic Government Affairs”, No. 10, 2023.

[56] Li Yizhu: “Research on the Legal Properties and Trading Relations of NFT Digital Works”, “Tsinghua Law”, No. 3, 2023.

[57] Wang Qian: “The Legal Qualification of NFT Digital Works Transactions”, “Oriental Law” 2023, No. 1.

[58] Kentucky, M. D. M. Transfers and Licensing of Copyrights to NFT PURCHASERS, Stanford Journal of Blockchain Law & AMP; POL.6.1, 2023, P.133.

[59] The agent is nominated: The intellectual property or other equity of the digital collection belongs to the issuer or right holder. Except for the authorization of the issuer or the right holder, you must not use the digital collections for any commercial use …Do not speculate on digital collections and overseas transactions.

[60] https://www.nftcn.com/pc/pc/notice_deta_user_f, visit date: July 8, 2023.The whale probe platform shall be made in the “Ant Chain Digital Collection Platform User Service Agreement” (version 20230215): users have the right to enjoy the browsing, purchase, sharing, transfer, dispute processing, order management, and access to digital collections on the platformInformation technology services such as appreciation, showing off, and information viewing; the copyright of digital collections is owned by the issuer or creator; in addition to obtaining a written conjunction of copyright rights in writing, users must not use digital collections for any commercial use.

[61] Yang Dong: “Definition of the Concept of Financial Consumers”, “Jurist” No. 5, 2014.

[62] Wu Teng: “Judicial Censorship of E -commerce Platform Self -Discipline Management Behavior”, “Journal of Jinan (Philosophy Social Science Edition)”, No. 10, 2023.