Research On Legal Risk Supervision Of Non-Fungible Token In China

Non-fungible token(NFT)are new products based on blockchain technology in the metaverse era,and their essence is a certificate of interest,forming a unique mapping relationship with the specific digital asset to be traded,which is connected to a smart contract on the blockchain and can record information about the initial issuer of the digital asset,the date of issuance,and every future transfer.NFT is hailed as a bridge between reality and the metaverse,subverting the previous traditional current transaction model and online digital works trading model,and at the same time bringing new legal confusion in terms of legal attributes and copyright infringement,which has attracted the attention of the legal community.With the pronouncement of the first NFT case in China,judicial practice has explored and responded to the confusion in the development of this new industry,which has cross-era significance,but the judgment of the first case is not a conclusion on the controversial part of NFT,but a new round of more fierce opinion debates in the academic circles.First of all,regarding the legal nature of NFT,there are currently several main views in the academic circles: "property rights theory","debt theory" and "virtual property theory",based on different legal attributes,scholars have proposed corresponding legal regulation paths.However,in the first instance court in the first NFT case,during the trial,it not only recognized that NFT transactions were the transfer of ownership of "digital goods",that is,recognized the property properties of NFT,but also held that NFT should be protected as "virtual property",which was confusing.Secondly,there are also inconsistencies in the premise of the application of the right of issuance and the exhaustion doctrine.Finally,the court also has insufficient arguments as to whether NFT transactions should fall into the scope of the right of issuance or belong to the right of online information dissemination for protection,and the judgment conclusions reached are unconvincing,leaving room for further discussion.For the above problems,this paper uses the literature research method,case analysis method and system analysis method to conduct in-depth analysis from the perspective of theory,analyzes the possible copyright infringement risks in the NFT transaction link on the basis of recognizing that NFT has property attributes,property rights attributes and copyright attributes,and puts forward his own views on the shortcomings in the first NFT case judgment.At the same time,it actively explores the application of the exhaustion doctrine in NFT transactions,analyzes its application dilemma,and demonstrates the necessity and possibility of breakthrough application of the exhaustion doctrine in the NFT field.Finally,this paper puts forward three suggestions for the supervision of NFT within the scope of the law,first,by clarifying the legal boundary of NFT,building a "law + technology" regulatory policy,secondly clarifying the division of government rights and responsibilities,adopting a regulatory sandbox plan,and finally improving the legal mechanism and exploring new ways of infringement bearing.