Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Non-fungible tokens (NFTs) are the latest trend to sweep markets from the art industry to professional sports leagues. These digital assets have existed for several years but have achieved explosive popularity only recently. In fact, the global market for NFTs reportedly hit over $40 billion in 2021. Despite this, the legal frameworks governing NFTs — which could significantly impact the risks and rewards of buying or selling NFTs — are still catching up. This article addresses another key legal dimension of NFTs: intellectual property protections.
|If you have not yet familiarized yourself with the basics of blockchain technology, that is the place to start. At its core, a blockchain is meant to be an immutable ledger that records one or a series of transactions, with each transaction verified by a peer-to-peer network rather than a centralized organization. The network constantly checks and validates the accuracy of the blockchain. Once on the blockchain, the record cannot be reversed or erased; one can only add a new blockchain recording the new information. Within that ledger technology, there are: 1) fungible tokens, meaning that one token can be replaced by any other token — a typical example is a cryptocurrency; and 2) non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
NFTs are completely unique digital assets and cannot be exchanged for one another. Instead, they primarily serve as digital tokens of ownership rendering the chain of custody more transparent for both NFT creators and purchasers. NFT purchasers can do due diligence by looking at the ledger. NFT creators can not only track the buyers or collectors interested in his or her work, but also benefit from it by, for example, embedding the provision of automatic resale royalties.
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
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 June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.
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.