Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Midwest Tungsten, a supplier of metal for industrial uses, recently paired a blockchain with a 14.545-inch, 2,000-pound cube of tungsten to produce a non-fungible token (NFT). Assets that are digitally transferrable between two parties via blockchain are commonly referred to as "tokens." An NFT is a crypto asset or "token" that represents or points to a physical or digital asset such as art, videos, land or, in this case, a cube of tungsten. NFT for tangible assets give rise to a range of legal liability issues including those related to asset storage, transfer, visitation rights (in the case of tangible NFTs), privacy rights, as well as related costs.
These tokens are designated as "non-fungible" because they are not interchangeable for other items; they are unique. Bitcoins, which also are blockchain assets, are not unique and are therefore fungible. One bitcoin, like one dollar bill, has the same characteristics as another; they are readily exchangeable because they are of exactly equal value.
NFTs give the NFT holder the ability to claim ownership of any unique asset that it represents. The resulting NFT is trackable, easy to transfer, and uses a trustworthy technology, namely, blockchain. Blockchains are widely distributed digital ledgers, which make them nearly immutable, that are used to record transactions in "blocks" of computer code that are time-stamped and linked together, evidencing the provenance of an asset, either digital or tangible. Blockchains also disclose the history of transactions for digital assets, making it impossible for an assets record to be modified or deleted.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.