|
NFT交易平台著作权审查义务的认定——以“中国NFT第一案”为切入点
|
Abstract:
NFT即非同质化代币,本质上是一种在区块链上用来标识特定内容的数据。当前,NFT已成为数字作品的新型传播形式,催生出NFT交易平台,并且产生出诸如NFT作品交易的著作权属性、NFT交易平台著作权审查义务认定等问题。从NFT交易性质上看,NFT本质上是财产权的流转,但应当尊重当事人的意思自治,不应否认交易包含著作权的转让或许可。从NFT交易平台的著作权审查义务上看,NFT交易平台仅需具备一般性的审查义务,而不应具备过高的审查义务,只有特殊的NFT交易平台才需承担较高的知识产权审查义务。
NFT, or non-homogenized token, is essentially a kind of data used to identify specific content on the blockchain. Currently, NFT has become a new form of dissemination of digital works, giving rise to NFT trading platforms, and generating issues such as the copyright attributes of NFT work transactions, and the determination of the copyright review obligations of NFT trading platforms. In terms of the nature of NFT transactions, NFT is essentially a transfer of property rights, but the autonomy of the parties should be respected, and it should not be denied that the transactions include the transfer or licensing of copyrights. From the perspective of the copyright examination obligation of NFT transaction platform, NFT transaction platform only needs to have the general examination obligation, and should not have the excessive examination obligation, only the special NFT transaction platform needs to bear the higher intellectual property examination obligation.
[1] | NFT有何显著特征? [EB/OL]. 百度文库.
https://wenku.baidu.com/view/1135d40140323968011ca300a6c30c225901f0a2.html, 2023-11-20. |
[2] | 陶乾. 论数字作品非同质代币化交易的法律意涵[J]. 东方法学, 2022(2): 70-80. |
[3] | 价值超300万元的NFT被盗, 周杰伦回应: 不是愚人节玩笑[EB/OL]. 澎湃新闻网.
https://m.thepaper.cn/baijiahao_17416692, 2023-11-23. |
[4] | 中国NFT第一案, 昨天在杭州宣判了[EB/OL]. 浙江网信网.
https://www.zjwx.gov.cn/art/2022/4/22/art_1673576_58871021.html, 2023-04-22. |
[5] | 齐爱民. 中国NFT侵权第一案涉及法律问题的深度分析[EB/OL].
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/MYDzUMmo-Y47vS0v0GfFDQ, 2023-11-28. |
[6] | 刘维. 数字藏品NFT交易平台的版权审查义务[EB/OL]. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/i6_mC8YiRlogQQR2PokWrw, 2022-04-25. |
[7] | 司晓. 区块链数字资产物权论[J]. 探索与争鸣, 2021(12): 80-90+178-179. |
[8] | 王迁. 知识产权法教程[M]. 第七版. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2021: 4. |
[9] | 熊皓男. 论网络服务提供者的版权审查义务[J]. 电子知识产权, 2021(6): 34-43. |
[10] | 谢光旗. 普遍与特殊: 网络服务提供者的著作权审查义务[J]. 西部法学评论, 2013(3): 71-77. |
[11] | Guadamuz, A. (2021) The Treachery of Images: Non-Fungible Tokens and Copyright. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 12, 1367-1385. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpab152 |
[12] | 虞婷婷. 网络服务商过错判定理念的修正——以知识产权审查义务的确立为中心[J]. 政治与法律, 2019(10): 123-133. |
[13] | 梁志文. 网络服务提供者的版权法规制模式[J]. 法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2017, 35(2): 100-108. |