NFT交易平台版权责任否定论  

Copyright liability denial of NFT transaction platform

作　　者：熊皓男 XIONG Haonan(Law School,Beijing Normal University,Beijing 100875,China)

机构地区：[1]北京师范大学法学院,北京100875

出　　处：《重庆邮电大学学报（社会科学版）》2023年第6期54-62,共9页Journal of Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金重点项目:现代诠释学视域下的法律原则理论研究(21AFX003)。

摘　　要：NFT交易平台是一类新兴网络服务提供者,旨在为数字藏品交易提供中介服务。网络服务提供者可能因网络用户未经许可上传他人作品而承担间接侵权责任。为防范此法律风险,承担较重注意义务的网络服务提供者需要采取主动的审查措施以应对侵权,否则将与网络用户共同承担连带责任。然而,NFT交易平台不应因未尽到事前的审查义务而承担版权侵权责任,理由有四点。首先,NFT交易平台性质上属于电子商务平台经营者,其审查义务轻于在线内容分享服务提供者。在相同情况下,后者不承担主动审查义务。举重明轻,NFT交易平台更不应承担此义务。其次,网络服务提供者对版权侵权的注意义务较重,但数字藏品的交易对象不是作品或著作权。作品的信息网络传播只是非同质化通证交易的“副产品”。再次,从通证交易技术特征的角度来看,NFT交易平台收取的Gas费与服务费均不属于“直接经济利益”,故其不应负有较高的注意义务。最后,NFT交易服务符合技术中立的标准,并与版权方的利益诉求高度一致,要求NFT交易平台承担审查义务难以促成其与版权方的商谈与合作。同时,滥用连带责任既是对直接侵权人的纵容,也是监管责任的不当转嫁,难以从根源上遏制版权侵权现象的发生。所以,应限制施加审查义务,谨慎适用连带责任。The NFT transaction platform is a new breed of internet service providers,which provides intermediary services for non-fungible token transactions.ISPs may be held liable for indirect infringement if their network users upload the works of others without permission.To mitigate this legal risk,internet service providers with heavier obligations should take proactive review measures to address infringement,or else they will share joint liability with network users.However,the NFT transaction platform should not bear copyright infringement liability for failing to fulfill the general monitoring obligation,for the following four reasons.Firstly,the NFT transaction platform is an e-commerce platform operator by nature,and the monitoring obligation is less than that of the hosting service provider.In the same circumstances,the latter will not be subject to the general monitoring obligation.From the greater to the less,NFT transaction platforms should not bear this obligation.Secondly,ISPs have a higher duty of care for copyright infringement,but digital collections transactions are not for works or copyright.The broadcasting of works is only a“by-product”of non-fungible token transactions.Thirdly,from the perspective of technical characteristics of token transactions,NFT transaction platforms do not charge Gas fees and service fees for“direct financial benefits”,so they should not bear higher duty of care.Finally,NFT trading services meet the standards of technology neutrality and are highly aligned with the interests of copyright holders,requiring NFT transaction platforms to assume monitoring obligations,which makes it difficult to promote discussions and cooperation with copyright holders.The abuse of joint liability is the connivance to the direct infringer and also the inappropriate shifting of supervision responsibility,making it difficult to fundamentally curb the occurrence of copyright infringement.Therefore,the application of monitoring obligation and joint liability should be limited.

关 键 词：非同质化通证 网络服务提供者 网络用户 间接侵权 版权审查 

分 类 号：D913[政治法律—民商法学]