China Court Network released a normative evaluation of the dual attributes of digital collection theft, and NFT theft was punished with the crime of theft.
Golden Finance reported that China Court Network released a normative evaluation of the dual attributes of stolen digital collections. The article pointed out that, unlike ordinary online images, digital collectibles such as NFTs are in line with the characteristics of online virtual property due to their non-tampering characteristics, unique codes and detailed transaction information. This highlights the scarcity of digital collections, as they have both use and exchange value. According to Article 127 of the Civil Code, from the perspective of civil law, online virtual property is regarded as an object of rights that is different from property rights, creditor's rights, intellectual property rights, etc., and is protected by civil law.
In addition, the article points out that theft of NFTs will be subject to corresponding criminal penalties, which can be assessed in conjunction with related criminal acts committed during the theft (such as hacking into computer systems or data theft).
The article concluded that theft of NFT should be punished as the crime of theft and sentencing is appropriate, which can reflect the different punishments corresponding to different amounts of property. This crime focuses on the illegal possession of a wide variety of public and private property, and its sentencing grades adopt the standard of amount plus circumstances. Digital collections have technical characteristics that cannot be copied, indicating that the holder has exclusive control. If a digital collection is stolen by others, the holder loses exclusive control. Digital collections have property value, which is reflected in different prices on the trading platform. For digital collections of different values, the crime of theft has separate provisions on sentencing levels, which is in line with the principle of commensurate crime and punishment.
#BTC #ETH
Golden Finance reported that China Court Network released a normative evaluation of the dual attributes of stolen digital collections. The article pointed out that, unlike ordinary online images, digital collectibles such as NFTs are in line with the characteristics of online virtual property due to their non-tampering characteristics, unique codes and detailed transaction information. This highlights the scarcity of digital collections, as they have both use and exchange value. According to Article 127 of the Civil Code, from the perspective of civil law, online virtual property is regarded as an object of rights that is different from property rights, creditor's rights, intellectual property rights, etc., and is protected by civil law.
In addition, the article points out that theft of NFTs will be subject to corresponding criminal penalties, which can be assessed in conjunction with related criminal acts committed during the theft (such as hacking into computer systems or data theft).
The article concluded that theft of NFT should be punished as the crime of theft and sentencing is appropriate, which can reflect the different punishments corresponding to different amounts of property. This crime focuses on the illegal possession of a wide variety of public and private property, and its sentencing grades adopt the standard of amount plus circumstances. Digital collections have technical characteristics that cannot be copied, indicating that the holder has exclusive control. If a digital collection is stolen by others, the holder loses exclusive control. Digital collections have property value, which is reflected in different prices on the trading platform. For digital collections of different values, the crime of theft has separate provisions on sentencing levels, which is in line with the principle of commensurate crime and punishment.
#BTC #ETH