区块链技术驱动下“发行权用尽”原则的法理重构:以NFT数字作品为中心

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (12)

全文: PDF (1134 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要技术发展促使作品传播方式由复制件占有转向基于体验的数字化使用模式,公众虽可随时访问作品内容,却难以获得作品复制件的财产权。随着区块链技术的发展,著作权领域出现了以NFT(非同质化代币)为代表的数字作品新形式。NFT 数字作品具有唯一性与不可拆分性、分布式与“去中心化”、基于智能合约等特征,为数字作品的权属确认与交易流通提供了可验证、可追溯的技术路径。但与技术发展相对的是著作权权利限制规则适用的滞后,作为著作权领域的一项重要原则,“发行权用尽”通过限制权利人控制复制件的后续转让收益,实现了著作权人与公众之间的利益平衡。然而,在数字环境中,许可使用数字化载体难以认定为发行行为,信息网络传播权与发行权的界限不明,以及转售所需复制行为可能构成侵权,均对该原则的适用构成法律障碍。区块链技术的发展为“发行权用尽”原则在数字环境下的适用提供了新的可能。本文针对NFT数字作品,基于区块链的技术特征,从规范目的与经济效率的视角出发,论证在数字环境下延伸“发行权用尽”原则的正当性,从法解释学层面回应“有形载体说”,旨在对“发行权用尽”原则进行法理重构,提出将“以转让载体所有权为核心的信息网络传播行为”界定为发行行为,以厘清权利边界,推动“发行权用尽”原则在数字环境中的合理适用。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	李昕梦

关键词 ：数字环境, 发行权用尽, 区块链, 数字作品

Abstract：Technological development has shifted the dissemination of works from physical copies to experience-based digital use,allowing public access while limiting property rights in copies.With blockchain,NFTs(non-fungible tokens)have emerged as a new form of digital work,featuring uniqueness,indivisibility,decentralization,and smart-contract-based traceability.This offers verifiable and traceable technical means for ownership confirmation and circulation.However,in a digital environment, licensing digital carriers is difficult to be recognized as distribution.The boundary between network communication and distribution rights is unclear,and reproduction for resale may constitute infringement,all posing obstacles to the exhaustion of distribution right principle.The development of blockchain technology provides new possibilities for the application of the“exhaustion of distribution right principle”in digital environments.This article examines NFT-based works from the perspectives of blockchain's technical features,normative purpose and economic efficiency,to argue for the legitimacy of extending the exhaustion of distribution right principle in the digital environment.It responds to the“tangible carrier theory”from a legal hermeneutic standpoint and aims to reconstruct the principle from the legal perspective.The article defines“information network communication involving transfer of carrier ownership”as distribution to clarify rights boundaries and promote the principle's reasonable application in digital contexts.

Key words： Digital environment Exhaustion of distribution right Block chain Digital work

收稿日期: 2025-07-18

PACS:

D923.41

基金资助:司法部法治建设与法学理论研究部级科研项目“发展与安全相统筹原则下的生成式人工智能法律治理研究”(24SFB2003)。

作者简介: 李昕梦(1999—),女,吉林长春人,博士研究生,研究方向为知识产权法,数字法学。

引用本文:

李昕梦. 区块链技术驱动下“发行权用尽”原则的法理重构:以NFT数字作品为中心[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2026(3): 32-42.
Li Xinmeng. The Doctrinal Reconstruction of the“Exhaustion of Distribution Right” Principle Under Blockchain Technology:Focusing on NFT Digital Works. , 2026(3): 32-42.

链接本文:

http://www.zgkjlt.org.cn/CN/Y2026/I3/32

[1]BODÓ B,GERVAIS D,QUINTAIS J P.Blockchain and smart contracts:The missing link in copyright licensing[J].International Journal of Law and Information Technology,2018,26(4):311-336.
[2]苏宇.非同质通证的法律性质与风险治理[J].东方法学,2022(2):58-69.
[3]王春燕.贸易中知识产权与物权冲突之解决原则:权利穷竭的含义、理论基础及效力范围[J].中国人民大学学报,2003(1):120-127.
[4]NIMMER M B,NIMMER D.Nimmer on copyright,Vol.2[M].New York:Matthew Bender & Company,2003.
[5]Copyright Law of the United States.§109(a)[EB/OL].(1976-10-19)[2025-06-22].https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf.
[6]Copyright,Designs and Patents Act.Section 18(3)(a)[EB/OL].(1988-11-15)[2025-06-22].https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents.
[7]Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society.Art.4(2)[EB/OL].(2001-06-22)[2025-06-22].https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/29/oj/eng.
[8]著作権法.第26条第(b)項第(2)号[EB/OL].(2020-06-12)[2025-06-22]https://hourei.net/law/345AC0000000048.
[9]何怀文.网络环境下的发行权[J].浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版),2013,43(5):150-159.
[10]刁胜先.论权利穷竭原则的本质:“知识产品权利分离说”之提出与解读[J].科技管理研究,2017,37(2):139-146.
[11]陈青.权利用尽原则的国际适用与发展[J].河北法学,2012,30(1):133-138.
[12]孙昊亮.网络环境下著作权的边界问题研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2017.
[13]REESE R A.First sale doctrine in the era of digital networks[J].Boston College Law Review,2002,44:577-652.
[14]MILLIOT J,REID C,HABASH G,et al.Digital imprints take root[EB/OL].(2012-07-13)[2024-08-10].http://perma.cc/CC2D-UMYN.
[15]CHIARIZIO M.An American tragedy:E-books,licenses,and the end of public lending libraries[J].Vanderbilt Law Review,2013,66:615-644.
[16]FISHER W W III.When should we permit differential pricing of information[J].UCLA Law Review,2007,55(1):1-38.
[17]European Commission.Estimating displacement rates of copyrighted content in the EU[EB/OL].(2017-09-25)[2025-04-10].file:///C:/Users/86183/Downloads/estimating%20displacement%20rates%20of%20copyrighted%20content-KM0414009ENN%20(2).pdf.
[18]兰德斯·威廉·M,波斯纳·理查德·A.知识产权法的经济结构[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2016.
[19]张玉洁.区块链技术的司法适用、体系难题与证据法革新[J].东方法学,2019(3):99-109.
[20]戈斯汀·保罗.著作权之道:从古登堡到数字点播机[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[21]王迁.论网络环境中发行权的适用[J].知识产权,2001(4):8-12.
[22]齐爱民.捍卫信息社会中的财产:信息财产法原理[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2009.
[23]杭州互联网法院(2022)浙0192民初1008号民事判决书[EB/OL].(2022-04-22).[2025-05-20]https://www.kwm.com/cn/zh/insights/latest-thinking/From-the-first-NFT-digital-collection-infringement-judgment-to-see-the-operational-risk-of-NFT-platform.html.
[24]李骐辛,于春.面向元宇宙的NFT数字出版发展策略研究[J].出版广角,2022(18):33-37.
[25]王鑫,宋伟.数字出版NFT模式下发行权穷竭规则适用探讨[J].科技与出版,2023(3):134-142.
[26]戈斯汀·保罗.著作权之道:从古登堡到数字点播机[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[27]孙昊亮.网络环境下著作权的边界问题研究[M].北京:法律出版社,2017.
[28]熊文聪.后现代主义视角下的著作权的正当性及其边界:从个体权利到基于商谈的共识[J].法律与政治,2010(6):70-79.
[29]亚伦·普赞诺斯基,杰森·舒尔茨.所有权的终结:数字时代的财产保护[M].赵精武,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2022.
[30]中华人民共和国民法典.第127条[EB/OL].(2020-06-01)[2025-03-02]https://www.court.gov.cn/zixun/xiangqing/233181.html.
[31]张新宝.论作为新型财产权的数据财产权[J].中国社会科学,2023(4):144-207.
[32]杭州互联网法院(2022)浙0192民初1008号民事判决书[EB/OL].(2022-04-22)[2025-04-13].https://www.kwm.com/cn/zh/insights/latest-thinking/From-the-first-NFT-digital-collection-infringement-judgment-to-see-the-operational-risk-of-NFT-platform.html.
[33]王迁.论NFT数字作品交易的法律定性[J].东方法学,2023(1):18-35.
[34]魏玮.论首次销售原则在数字版权作品转售中的适用[J].知识产权,2014(6):21-28.
[35]罗伯特·考特,托马斯·尤伦.法和经济学[M].史晋川,董雪兵,译.北京:格致出版社,2010.
[36]戈斯汀·保罗.著作权之道:从古登堡到数字点播机[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2008.
[37]王迁.网络著作权专有权利研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2022.
[38]HARDY I T.Not so different:Tangible,intangible,digital,and analog works and their]comparison for copyright purposes[J].University of Dayton Law Review,2001,26:211-246.
[39]黄波.非同质化代币数字艺术作品的版权风险与防范[J].出版发行研究,2022(6):59-64.
[40]TAKEYAMA L N.The welfare implications of unauthorized reproduction of intellectual property in the presence of demand network externalities[J].The Journal of Industrial Economics,1994,42:155-166.
[41]邵春燕,薛巍立.数字盗版泛滥的复杂影响及其治理路径研究[J].经济问题,2022(12):9-16.
[42]PEITZ M,WAELBROECK P.Why the music industry may gain from free downloading:The role of sampling[J].International Journal of Industrial Organization,2006,24(5):907-913.
[43]王迁.网络著作权专有权利研究[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2022.
[44]World Intellectual Property Organization.Agreed statement concerning the WIPO Copyright Treaty.Article 6[EB/OL].(1996-12-20)[2025-06-11].https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/295456.
[45]World Intellectual Property Organization.Agreed statements concerning WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.Articles 2(e),8,9,12,and 13[EB/OL].(1996-12-20)[2025-06-11].https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/295690.
[46]European Commission.Report on the implementation and effects of directive 91/250/EEC on the legal protection of computer programs.[EB/OL].(2000-04-10)[2025-06-11].https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2000:0199:FIN:EN:PDF.
[47]Directive 2001/29/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society.Recital[EB/OL].(2001-06-22)[2025-06-13].https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/29/oj/eng.
[48]刘春田.知识产权法(第6版)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2022.
[49]王迁.论网络环境中的“首次销售原则”[J].法学杂志,2006(3):117-121.
[50]李扬,邢贺通.论数字藏品交易行为的发行权规制路径[J/OL].重庆大学学报(社会科学版),2025[2025-01-03].Doi:10.11835/j.issn.1008-5831.fx.2024.12.003.
[51]Copyright Law of the United States.§106(3)[EB/OL].(1976-10-19)[2025-06-22].https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf.
[52]Copyright Law of the United States.§101(a)[EB/OL].(1976-10-19)[2025-06-22].https://www.copyright.gov/title17/title17.pdf.
[53]Copyright,Designs and Patents Act.Section 18(1)[EB/OL].(1988-11-15)[2025-06-22].https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents.
[54]Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society.Article4(1)[EB/OL].(2001-06-22)[2025-06-13].https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/29/oj/eng.
[55]UsedSoft GmbH v.Oracle International Corp.(C-128/11)[EB/OL].(2012-06-03)[2025-04-02].https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A62011CJ0128.
[56]李剑,吴汉东,许惠春等.网络著作权的司法保护[J].数字法治,2025(2):1-20.
[57]Capitol Records,LLC v.ReDigi Inc.[EB/OL].(2018-12-12)[2025-04-02].https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/16-2321/16-2321-2018-12-12.html.
[58]U.S.Copyright Office.DMCA Section 104 Report[EB/OL].(2001-08-29)[2025-05-22]https://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/sec-104-report-vol-1.pdf.
[59]陶乾.论数字作品非同质代币化交易的法律意涵[J].东方法学,2022(2):70-80.
[60]刘春田.《〈著作权法〉第三次修改是国情巨变的要求》[J].知识产权,2012(5):7-12.