Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor at the Law department, University of shahid madani

Abstract

Undoubtedly, the emergence and development of blockchain technology in 2009 has been one of the most significant transformations in various economic and social fields over the past two decades. Blockchain, literally meaning "chain of blocks," is an innovative system for recording data, in which information is stored on blocks with limited capacity. Once each block is filled, data is then recorded on the subsequent block, thereby creating a chain of blocks, which is referred to as the blockchain network. What makes the process of recording information on the blockchain unique is that it can operate in a decentralized manner, without the involvement of a central authority. The verification of data entries or changes is carried out by network users, which leads to the creation of a secure and cost-efficient network that can be used for a wide variety of applications, with the creation of cryptocurrencies and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) being only a small fraction of its potential uses.
The NFT market, which can be traced back to 2014, experienced remarkable growth between 2020 and 2021. The trade volume of NFTs surged to over $17 billion in 2021, representing a 21,000% increase compared to the total of $82 million in 2020. During this time, NFTs were increasingly utilized as speculative investments, drawing significant criticism due to the energy consumption required for their production and the carbon footprint associated with validating blockchain transactions. Additionally, NFTs have been repeatedly used in art fraud, prompting various legal analyses concerning the applicable legal regime for these tokens and the establishment of regulations for their creation and transfer.
Despite NFT proponents claiming that these tokens provide a clear certificate of ownership, the legal rights transferred through an NFT remain ambiguous in many cases. This ambiguity arises from several factors. For example, the transfer of an NFT does not necessarily imply the transfer of intellectual property or other legal rights to the buyer. Moreover, in many cases, an examination of the parties’ contract reveals that the intention was to grant a license to use the token, rather than to sell it. Conversely, even when the contract is labeled as a license agreement, the substance of the transaction may indicate the parties' intention to transfer ownership of the NFT. This issue becomes even more complex when considering that an NFT does not restrict the sharing or copying of the associated digital file, nor does it prevent the creation of other NFTs that reference the same file.
Hypothesis
The initial hypothesis of this article is based on the notion that non-fungible tokens (NFTs) fall under the category of digital goods. However, applying the legal frameworks governing intellectual property contracts to NFTs is not suitable, as it leaves many issues unresolved, including the formation, execution, and the legal rights transferred. This problem stems from the confusion between the NFT itself and the associated artwork. While NFTs can be examined as intangible assets, under Iranian law, the precise nature of an NFT must be analyzed independently of the artwork upon which it is based. Additionally, the legal transaction occurring during the transfer of the NFT must be clearly defined to establish an appropriate legal framework. It appears that the transfer of NFTs can be considered under the framework of a sales contract within Iranian law.
Methodology
The research method used in this study is the description and examination of the prevalent theories with an analytical approach along with the critique of these theories. Considering all the basic and effective elements in the nature of bargaining power and confronting abusive bargaining power, through a logical standpoint to the status of common law countries and the method of applying it in Iranian law.
Conclusion
The analysis revealed that NFTs have various forms and applications. The nature of NFTs is that of personal digital assets, which also possess characteristics of ownership under Islamic jurisprudence and Iranian law. Using the framework of a licensing agreement for the transfer of NFTs does not align with the rights and obligations of the parties involved in the customary practice of NFT transactions. A license cannot be considered a necessary element in the transfer of NFTs. In some cases, such a license may be issued, while in others, the transfer occurs without granting a license. Furthermore, in certain instances, the license pertains to the NFT itself, whereas in others, it relates to the sales platform.
The study demonstrated that, in Iranian law and jurisprudence, the term "property" in the definition of a sales contract is intended to exclude the sale of services from the scope of the contract. Given that the legislator has accepted the sale of intangible property in various contexts, there is no objection to considering the transfer of NFT ownership as a sale. Intangible property refers to assets that do not have a physical existence but are recognized by society and law. Legal scholars have expanded the scope of intangible property to include any type of financial right. Thus, all proprietary rights (excluding ownership, which is commonly associated with its physical subject matter), such as the right of usufruct, easements, debts, business goodwill, and intellectual property rights (including literary, artistic, and industrial property), as well as NFTs, are considered intangible property. In cases where the parties' intention is to sell the NFT, the principles of a sales contract can be applied to the transfer of NFTs in Iranian law, similar to the approach observed in U.S. law. By doing so, not only can the rights and obligations of the parties be clearly defined, but also various protective rules applicable to the sale of goods and services can be extended to these contracts. This approach is more consistent with the recognition of NFTs as personal digital assets.

Keywords

Main Subjects

 

-          Fairfield, Joshua A.T. (2022). Tokenized: The Law of Non-Fungible Tokens and Unique Digital Property. Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 97, Iss. 4.

Palgrave, Robert Harry Inglis. (1908). "Personal property" in Dictionary of political economy. Vol. 3.

 

-           

Articles:

-          Allison Christians. (2020). Taxation in the Age of Smart Contracts: The CryptoKitty Conundrum. 16 Ohio St. Tech. L. J. 91, 99.

-          Ante, Lennart. (2021). Non-fungible Token (NFT) Markets on the Ethereum Blockchain: Temporal Development, Cointegration and Interrelations. p. 2, 4.

-          Chohan, Usman W. (2021). Non-Fungible Tokens: Blockchains, Scarcity, and Value. Critical Blockchain Research Initiative (CBRI) Working Papers, 2021, pp. 2-4.

-          Crow, K., Ostroff C., Beeple NFT fetches record-breaking $69 million in Christies sale, Wall Street J., online (2021) Available at: :https://www.wsj.com/articles/beeple-nft-fetches-record-breaking-69-million-in-christies-sale-11615477732?reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

-          Dowling, M. (2021a). Is non-fungible token pricing driven by cryptocurrencies? Financ. Res. Lett. 102097.

-          Fairfield, Joshua A.T. (2019). The Human Element: The Under‑Theorized and Underutilized Component Vital to Fostering Blockchain Development. 67 Clev. St. L. Rev. 33, 33–34.

-           - Fairfield, BitProperty, (2015), Southern California Law Review, Vol. 88, pp. 805–74.

-          Guadamuz Andres. (2021). The treachery of images: non-fungible tokens and copyright. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Vol. 01, p. 10.

-          Howcroft, Elizabeth. (2021, March 17). Explainer: NFTs are hot. So what are they? Reuters. Retrieved April 6, 2021.

-          Hufnagel, Saskia & King, Colin. (2023). Non-Fungible Tokens: Art and Crime in a Virtual World. p.8 [SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4370145 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4370145]

-          Ostroff, Caitlin. (2021, December 12). "The NFT Origin Story, Starring Digital Cats". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/video/series/wsjglossary/nfts-are-fueling-a-boom-in-digital-art-heres-how-they-work/F5BA93AD-3DCD-4EFA-B064-C9143C81CB88

-          Sifers ,Randall (1997), "Regulating Electronic Money in Small-Value Payment. Systems", 49Federal Communication Law Journal ,

-          Thomas A. Magnani & Benjamin G. Danieli. (2023). Non-fungible Token (NFT) Purchase and License Agreement. LexisNexis Practice Guidance, available at: https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/2023/01/nft-purchase-and-license-agreement

-          U.S. NFT trademarks applications skyrocketed 400x in 2021 with 15 registrations daily in 2022. (2022, February 16).

-          Zmudzinski, Adrian. (2019). "SEC: If Bitcoin Was a Security, It Would ‘Raise Substantial Issues”. Retrieved from https://cointelegraph.com/news/sec-if-bitcoin-was-a-security-it-would-raise-substantial-issues

Zuckerman, M. (2018). “New York Federal Judge Rules That CFTC Can Regulate Cryptocurrencies as Commodities”. Retrieved from https://cointelegraph.com/news/new-york-federal-judge-rules-that-cftc-can-regulate-cryptocurrencies-as-commodities

 

-           

Translated References into English
- Emami, Seyyed Hassan. Civil Law, Vol. 1. Tehran: Eslamiyeh Bookstore Publications, 19th edition, 1998. [In Persian]
- Jafari Langroudi, Mohammad Jafar. Legal Terminology. Tehran: Ganj Danesh Library Publications, 19th edition, 2008. [In Persian]
- Jafari Langroudi, Mohammad Jafar. Annotated Collection of the Civil Code (Scientific, Comparative, Historical). Tehran: Ganj Danesh Publications, 4th edition, 2012. [In Persian]
- Shahidi, Mehdi. Formation of Contracts and Obligations. Tehran: Hoghoughdan Publishing, 1st edition, 1998. [In Persian]
- Farhangestan, Mirkeshkari, Javad (Ed.). Third Volume. Tehran: Academy of Persian Language and Literature Publications, N.D. [In Persian]
- Katouzian, Nasser. Contracts of Specific Nature, Vol. 4. Tehran: Enteshar Company, 2nd edition, 1997. [In Persian]
- Esmaeili Ataabadi, Aghil & Fathizadeh, Amir Houshang. "Legal Aspects of Smart Contract Applications." First International Conference on Knowledge Management, Blockchain, and Economy, Tehran, 2019. [In Persian]
- Dehghani Firouzabadi, Zahra & Arefmanesh, Zahra. "Non-Fungible Tokens and Factors Affecting Their Pricing: A Meta-Synthesis Approach." Financial Management Strategy, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2024. [In Persian]
- Rabbani Mousavian, Seyyed Ali. "Legitimacy of Cryptocurrencies from the Perspective of Governmental and Individual Fiqh." Islamic Jurisprudence and Law Research, Vol. 16, No. 60, September 2020. [In Persian]
- Shirani, Masoud, & Talakesh, Malika Sadat. "Blockchain Legislation in Iran, China, and the UK." Legal Civilization, Vol. 3, Autumn and Winter 2020, No. 7. [In Persian]
- Ziaee, Seyyed Yaser, & Hosseini, Seyyedeh Masoumeh. "The Status of Cryptocurrencies in International Trade and Foreign Investment Law." Law and New Technologies, Vol. 4, No. 8, 2023. [In Persian]
- Afsharipour, Gholamreza & Hosseinpour, Mohammadreza. "The Nature and Characteristics of License Contracts and Their Compatibility with Specific Contracts in Iranian Civil Law." Legal Studies, Vol. 12, No. 1, Spring 2016. [In Persian]
- Madadi, Mehdi, & Ghaemi Kharaq, Mohsen Shafie, & Shafiee, Ghasem. "A Jurisprudential and Legal Inquiry into the Issue of Regulating Cryptocurrencies." Majlis and Strategy Journal, Vol. 28, Spring 2021, No. 105. [In Persian]
- Mostafa Bakhtiarvand, & Hamid Baradaran Senjedak. "Exclusive License Agreement for Industrial Property Rights." Legal Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2015. [In Persian]
- Ansari, Sheikh Morteza. Makaseb. Tabriz: Lithograph edition in one volume, written by Taher Khoshnevis, N.D. [In Arabic]
- Khoei, Abolghasem. Misbah al-Fiqh in Transactions, Vol. 1. Qom: Vojdani Publishing, 3rd edition, N.D. [In Arabic]
- Najafi, Mohammad Hassan. Jawahir al-Kalam, Vol. 20. Tehran: Dar al-Kotob al-Islamiya, 10th edition, 1995. [In Arabic]