Important Legal Issues for Buyers and Sellers of NFTs
WHAT ARE NFTS?
NFTs are the latest digital asset to have taken the world by storm. Similar to cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum, NFTs are recorded on a blockchain ledger to verify ownership. However, while a cryptocurrency’s tokens are interchangeable and indistinguishable, each NFT is a unique asset such as a particular document, image, or video.
POTENTIAL FOR INFRINGEMENT AND ENFORCEMENT
Those who buy and use or resell NFTs should be particularly aware of the potential for infringement. Generally, NFT marketplaces verify sellers to ensure authenticity, however, this does not eliminate the possibility that a NFT is infringing another’s intellectual property rights. As a result, buyers should always conduct their own due diligence.
Last July, Opensea, a leading marketplace for the resale of NFTs, delisted a seller after receiving a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) notice alleging infringement. The delisted seller, “CryptoPhunks” was parodying NFTs created by, “CryptoPunks”, a very well-known seller who submitted the DMCA notice. Reactions to the CryptoPhunks delisting were mixed with many accusing the platform of censorship. What many critics may not realize is that Opensea was protecting not only themselves but potential purchasers of CryptoPhunks NFTs.
Under Section 504 of the Copyright Act, any person who sells an infringing work can be liable for statutory damages between $750 and $30,000 per infringement. This applies whether or not the seller knew that they were selling infringing material. With this, CryptoPunks would have been able to bring a claim against any person who bought and resold a NFT from CryptoPhunks based on alleged infringement.
Further, the Copyright Alternative in Small Claims Enforcement Act (the “CASE Act”), which passed in late 2020, is designed to streamline the process by which CryptoPunks or other owners of allegedly infringed property can bring these claims. By providing a cheaper and less expensive framework for copyright litigation, the CASE Act incentivizes rightsholders to enforce their rights in situations which previously would not be worth the hassle of federal court and is likely to increase NFT-related enforcement actions.
When deciding whether to purchase NFTs, all potential buyers should consider the possibility of infringement and the potential for personal liability . Some risky parodies may provide resale value —and a good laugh—but ultimately will not be worth the headache of defending an enforcement action.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Jason focuses his practice on corporate governance, commercial finance, commercial contracts, and employment law. He advises clients on all aspects of general corporate matters and strategic business decisions including organization structure, operating/shareholder agreements, and private debt and equity offerings.
Recent Crypto Enforcement Actions and the Brewing Battle Between Regulators for Jurisdiction Over Digital Assets
Readers of my last, irresistibly juicy blog post, “First-Ever Court Ruling Means Your Utility Token May Be an Unregistered Security,” know that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently landed a blow against blockchain-based media company LBRY when a district court in New Hampshire held that LBRY’s native “utility token,” LBC, was an unregistered security.
Entity Selection: How QSBS Could Save You Millions in Taxes
I often work with entrepreneurs starting new ventures. While there are multiple considerations for new businesses, the first important item to address is entity formation, governance, and finance/ownership. This is the starting point to get your venture headed in the right direction.
Do Colorado Courts Still Enforce Liquidated Damages Provisions?
Do Colorado courts still enforce liquidated damages provisions? When are such provisions enforceable? As a litigator, I notice this is a frequent topic of conversation among my transactional attorney friends when they are drafting contracts with no real consensus. So, what does Colorado law say?