Abstract:Data has become a core driving force for economic development, and revitalizing the value and promoting the use of data assets is the main goal of the current efforts to promote the market-oriented allocation of data elements and comprehensively build a digital China. As the process of realizing the value of data is constrained by financial and technological inputs, the release of data potential faces bottlenecks. Against this background, data asset securitization, as an innovative mode of combining data assets and securities financing, can expand financing channels and reduce financing costs for enterprises to activate the value of data assets, which has attracted much attention and continues to transmit new trends. At present, this new model of securities is in the preliminary stage of exploration, it is necessary to explain the intrinsic rationale for the realization of its value based on the triple value evolution from data resources to data assets to data capitalization, that is, it is the dynamic practice of initially generating data resources to processing and acquiring data assets and then realizing the securitization of data assets, which embodies the value-added value of data elements. In this dynamic process, the unique attributes of data elements distinguish data asset securitization from traditional asset securitization, presenting a deep connection with emerging technologies, especially blockchain technology, and its technologically native characteristics help to facilitate the digital reshaping of the entire process of securities. By reviewing the current development status of the new model of securities coupled with data+capital, it is found that there are many problems in the exploration of data asset securitization, such as unclear property rights specification, missing transaction mechanism, mismatch of supervision and management, etc., which have become constraints to activate the value of data assets. In view of this, based on the dual objectives of financial innovation and risk prevention and control, the path design should be carried out from the two-dimensional perspective of the synergistic effect of law and technology to crack the realistic dilemma of the current practice of data asset securitization. Specifically, in order to release the value potential of data assets and promote the securitization of data assets, it is necessary to strengthen the supply of the legal system by improving the property rights system, transaction norms and regulatory rules; enhance the technical support of blockchain by promoting the use of technology and perfecting the technical norms; and promote the overall effect of the supply of law and technological empowerment through the synergy of the objectives, the articulation of rules and the coordination of interests.

Abstract:Since the concept of Bitcoin was proposed in 2008, the scale and speed of impact of blockchain on social governance structure and industrial architecture have been unprecedented, especially in the field of value storage such as finance. The changes brought by blockchain are revolutionary. The prosperity of blockchain requires effective legal supervision. The distributed architecture, consensus mechanism, anonymity, and immutability of blockchain are not only key elements in the development of blockchain, but also a breeding ground for implementing anti-competitive behavior. The problem of consensus is solved by cryptography, but the industrialization of mining also easily leads to the concentration of computing power. Collusion among operators promoted by token incentives and opaque effects formed inside and outside blockchain, mutual supervision and enforcement platforms provided for collusion, discriminatory behavior and exploitative pricing, and other anti-competitive behaviors, the fundamental position of blockchain platforms and standardization provide conditions for the abuse of market dominance, which must be effectively regulated. The decentralization of blockchain platforms naturally excludes regulation, bringing about difficulties in defining market entities. Its decentralized management mechanism makes it difficult to effectively allocate responsibilities, and the immutability of blockchain makes traditional remedies ineffective. Therefore, it is necessary to apply behavioral conditions such as modifying platform rules and algorithms to create forks at various nodes online and determine non-traditional measures such as terminating relevant transactions on the platform. The traditional pyramid shaped hierarchical anti-competitive regulatory model shows a mismatch and unsuitability when facing blockchain. Blockchain technology and anti-monopoly should be interconnected in terms of value, adhering to a cooperative relationship rather than mutual exclusion, and jointly adhering to basic value principles such as maintaining security, competition, and reliability. The principle of inclusive and prudent supervision should be implemented on blockchain platforms to address the traditional regulatory paradox of management leads to death, release leads to chaos. In other words, on blockchain platforms, at present, various influencing factors can be comprehensively considered in accordance with Article 27 of the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China and Chapter 3 of the Interim Provisions on the Examination of Concentration of Business Operators. From the perspective of technical control ability, economic value intervention ability, and normative influence ability, anti-competitive behaviors can be identified, subject locked, and responsibility allocated. The transformation from code as law to law as code can be completed from a conceptual perspective, with emphasis on smart supervision and the use of safe harbors and regulatory sandboxes in tools. Measures and mechanisms for proactive prevention and effective and flexible remedies after the event can be constructed, and cooperation and collaborative supervision should be emphasized to comprehensively reform supervision. From code to law, the legal governance model in the algorithm era should adhere to a technology driven proactive and functional regulatory strategy, taking into account the interests and needs of different entities, achieving dual governance of law and technology, and accelerating the development of China’s new quality productivity.

Abstract:The current concentration-distribution model of government data opening not only has the chronic disease of over centralization, but also is difficult to ensure the overall effect of data distribution. In the process of data concentration, the data of multiple nodes is difficult to converge to the central node. In the process of data distribution, the data of central node is difficult to transfer to multiple nodes; In the process of data utilization, multiple nodes are difficult to interact with the central node. In view of this, it is necessary to change the current model of government data opening and seek a new technical support for it. Blockchain is an ideal technology to solve the problem of government data opening. Through four kinds of mechanisms including communication, storage, security, consensus, blockchain can ensure data flow, overcome single point of failure and bureaucratic organization limitations as well as promote the government to change its functions and enable multiple subjects to participate in data opening. However, when the single blockchain technology is applied to the opening of government data, it is still in danger of circumventing supervision, solidifying errors, cracking algorithms and re-centralization. There are problems that decentralization, security and scalability cannot be realized at the same time. Facing the technical demand of government data opening and the ternary paradox of blockchain technology, this paper introduces the concept of sovereign blockchain to explore the path of government data opening that can realize the compatibility of centralized sovereign state supervision and decentralized blockchain technology. There is a connection between sovereign blockchain and government data opening. Sovereign blockchain is a governance technology which can integrate institution and technology as well as has the function of distributing and concentrating. Relying on sovereign blockchain, we can build a government data opening model with government guidance and joint governance of nodes. Specifically, sovereign blockchain is composed of public blockchain, consortium blockchain and private blockchain. This structure helps to overcome the ternary paradox of single blockchain technology. Therefore, in the process of government data opening, we can choose appropriate blockchains according to different data types and application scenarios, and then create a sovereign blockchain of chain governance by building a public blockchain platform for the public, promoting the consortium blockchain governance of collaborative institutions, and strengthening the private blockchain isolation of functional departments. In government data opening based on sovereign blockchain, the public blockchain with distributed and open characteristics is conducive to the sharing of underlying data and the access of the consortium blockchain. The consortium blockchain can not only build a data sharing platform between government departments by limiting the participating nodes to a limited range, but also establish a legal chain by embedding the public blockchain, and place the blockchain under the sovereignty framework to ensure national supervision. The data on the public blockchain will be tested by the consortium blockchain, in which sensitive data will be retained on the private blockchain, and other data will be transmitted to the public from the public blockchain. The private blockchain is used to provide a secure storage environment for the diverted sensitive data.

Abstract:E-CNY is distinct from private digital currency, Chinese Yuan in cash and mobile payment with many characteristics. The amount of cases about currency crimes in China has not decreased with the extensive usage of mobile payment. Conversely, it has a tendency of rising these years on the whole. The situation resulted in the increase of the legislative and applicative values of the currency crimes on the whole. Referring to e-CNY, we could adopt a reform scheme about the currency crimes which is the combination of legislative amendment, interpretation of criminal law and theory innovation. It concretely includes the following ways:canceling the application of altering currency crime and coping with the conduct of altering e-CNY in terms of counterfeiting currency crime; revising related low-rank normative documents about counterfeiting currency crime and newly interpreting related constitutive elements. When this crime is applied, we should note that counterfeiting currency crime is a conduct crime, whose accomplished situation does not require a result such as entry into circulation or completion of payment, and this applies to e-CNY. In the case of e-CNY, the purpose of circulation should be retained rather than removed from the subjective constituent elements of the crime. Severer penalties should be imposed on professional offender of counterfeiting e-CNY; the application of holding fake currency crime and transporting fake currency crime should be canceled, and the conducts of holding and transporting fake e-CNY should be decriminalized; buying fake currency crime, selling fake currency crime and using fake currency crime could be applied to e-CNY. However, we should note that the subjective constituent elements of purchasing counterfeit currency crime requires the purpose of circulation, whereas the subjective constituent elements of selling counterfeit currency crime does not require such a purpose. In the case of using counterfeit currency crime, the judgement of whether a certain conduct is using must be based closely on entering into circulation. All conduct forms leading to the entry into circulation of counterfeit currency, including payment of consideration, repayment of debts, provision to others as a deposit, verification of registered capital, exchange, gift, deposit in a financial institution, exchange for real currency, etc., are considered to be using, but mere presentation and entrustment for safekeeping are not considered to be using. While judging whether fake e-CNY is in circulation, the term possession which is closely related to tangible objects should not be used, but the term domination which has a stronger abstract meaning should be used. Specifically, when another person obtains dominion over counterfeit currency from a conductor by means of electronic payment or decrypts the encrypted data of counterfeit currency and is able to dominate it at will, the counterfeit currency enters into circulation. When the conduct of using fake e-CNY of a conductor ostensibly constitutes both using fake currency crime and the fraud crime, the relationship between the two crimes is not coincidence of articles but imaginative concurrence. In accordance with the principle that imaginative concurrence should be sentenced on the basis of the most serious crime, the conducts conduct should be deemed to be using counterfeit currency crime which has a severer statutory penalty.

Abstract:The smart era not only has a serious impact on the traditional social trust system, but also puts forward new requirements for social governance. In essence, the emergence of blockchain technology solves the discrimination in the process of information exchange in the zero-trust internet. In practice, intelligent technology represented by blockchain has become a new anti-counterfeiting verification and authorization application technology which is replaceable, convenient and safe. The application and development of this technology provides a new development idea for social governance, especially the credit system practice in the civil field, and will solve the risk of contract system in the traditional society. As a new type of data technology, blockchain has the technical characteristics of distributed decentralization, no need for credit system, immutable and data encryption security. It can play an important role in the field of social credit and have a positive impact on the development of the rule of law in the age of wisdom. Faced with the crisis of trust in social development, it is of great social significance to explore the advantages of smart contract technology application driven by blockchain technology to promote the practical application of emerging technologies. However, in the operation process of blockchain technology, there are also uncertainties in the protection of individual rights, the instability of social and economic order, and the negative effects of the construction of social credit system. The reason lies in the technical factors such as the security risk of private key, the risk of algorithm, and the limitation of basic support in the application of blockchain. In the face of the application risk of blockchain, the traditional regulation path with rigid laws and regulations as the core has obvious lag and limitations, and the emerging technologies lacking supervision will have adverse effects on social development due to the defects of their technical logic. On the basis of clarifying the technical logic and rule characteristics of blockchain, a development road of intelligent technical regulation that conforms to the development of blockchain and matches the reality of China will be constructed. This regulation path will take soft regulation as the basic idea, introduce multiple subjects to participate in blockchain governance, to achieve a high degree of unity between code governance and legal-rational governance, formal rule of law and substantive rule of law, so as to build the legal order of intelligent society, and truly play the important role of blockchain technology in data sharing, improving collaborative efficiency, building social credit system and other fields. In the specific regulation practice of blockchain technology, it is necessary to take the overall national security concept as the value basis, build a clear data governance strategy, and conduct appropriate regulatory sandbox experiment, so as to complete the linkage between online and offline, and build good laws and good governance of an intelligent society. Finally, the important strategic goal of high-quality rule of law construction to ensure high-quality development can be realized.

Abstract:Media has important influence on the dissemination of knowledge in time and space. The current academic evaluation system originated and developed in the paper media environment supported by printing, and has played a positive role in the development of science and technology. However, with the development of network technology, its limitations are becoming more and more prominent. The closeness in the process of academic publishing forms a sharp contradiction with the openness and interaction of the network. As the main subject of academic production, the rights of academic community fall aside, and publishers become the center of the academic ecosystem. Blockchain has the characteristics of non forgeability, leaving traces in the whole process, traceability, openness and transparency, collective maintenance, etc., and has broad application prospects. In the academic field, there are many blockchain application platforms abroad. Taking Scienceroot as an example, this paper analyzes the characteristics and weaknesses of block chain academic network platform in private field. Scienceroot operates based on Science Token, which integrates scientific research collaboration, funding and publishing, academic evaluation and trading. It is a new academic ecosystem based on network and scientific researchers. In the system, academic evaluation has the following characteristics:first, it is disintermediated, the range of evaluation experts is wider, the matching is more accurate and flexible, the author can participate in it, the evaluation process is open and transparent, and the labor of evaluation experts can be confirmed and encouraged; second, the object of evaluation may be either mature achievements or just scientific research topics; third, the combination of peer review and quantitative evaluation, content evaluation and influence evaluation. Although the platform has built a new academic ecosystem, for the platform was founded by technology enterprises, it also has some problems, such as the contradiction between the profit seeking nature of capital and the publicity of academic products, the unclear fairness and recognition of evaluation, and the operation efficiency of public chain.In addition to being used by private publishing publishers or technology enterprises, blockchain may also be used by academic research institutions such as public universities, where the real value lies. In this field, the academic network platform based on blockchain can realize the virtual reconstruction of academic community. Through online academic institution alliance or discipline alliance, the academic community can truly participate in academic cooperation and academic production and exercise the right of academic evaluation. This academic ecosystem is dominated by the academic community, and multiple subjects participate in evaluation and exchange. Incentive mechanism can recognize and reward experts peer review, and encourage them to participate in it more actively. The consensus mechanism enables the evaluation mechanism to be generally recognized by the academic community. Smart contract helps to encourage cooperation among scientific researchers and promote the market transformation of scientific research achievements. On the one hand, this academic ecosystem not only retains the advantages of the Scienceroot platform in the private field, but also effectively avoids the impact of the profit seeking nature of capital on the publicity of academic products, which is conducive to breaking the excessive intervention of bureaucratic administrative organizations in academic evaluation and reducing academic privileges and academic rent-seeking behavior On the other hand, based on the consensus of academic peers, this evaluation can be widely recognized by academic institutions in the alliance and quickly break the publishing centered academic evaluation system. Although blockchain is of positive significance to the reform of academic evaluation system, due to the limitations of blockchain technology itself, how to solve the problems of accounting node risk and operation efficiency in practice still needs to be deeply studied and discussed.

Abstract:The characteristics of blockchain technology, on the one hand, lay the possibility of its application in finance, which is an important cornerstone of civilized society, and on the other hand, lay the clues for the illegal risks in blockchain financial activities. Based on the actual financial application scenario of blockchain technology, the risk of illegal application of blockchain technology in the financial field is firstly reflected in the promotion of cryptocurrency-based blockchain financial ecology for fraudulent purchase of foreign exchange crimes and money laundering crimes. Blockchain ICO and other centralized financial activities have brought about the risk of disrupting the financial order, such as insider trading crimes and financial fraud crimes. The further development and application of blockchain technology has also given rise to crime forms in decentralized scenarios based on smart contracts. Thinking about the rule of blockchain financial crimes, the lack of current law norms and the risk endogenous nature of blockchain technology have jointly led to the difficulty of identifying related crimes. Therefore, to better cope with the criminal law risks in blockchain finance, it is necessary to follow the principle of internal and external distinction to regulate the relevant risks. From an external perspective, to bring blockchain financial crimes into the rule of criminal law, the criminal law characterization of cryptocurrencies must first be re-evaluated. In this regard, the nature of different cryptocurrencies should be discussed on a case-by-case basis. At the same time, it is also necessary to clarify the legal status of the subjects of blockchain technology development, and reasonably define the platform responsibilities of relevant blockchain enterprises and the way of supervision. The current one-size-fits-all regulatory approach should be rethought, and a regulatory sandbox model with inclusive features should be adopted to allow relevant enterprises to carry out disruptive innovations within a controlled scope, and to reasonably set platform responsibilities based on an inclusive and prudent regulatory approach. As far as the internal perspective is concerned, the rules of governance in the blockchain field also require blockchain enterprises to integrate criminal compliance requirements as internal control means. Specifically, domestic enterprises involved in blockchain information services should effectively fulfill domestic regulatory requirements; enterprises involved in blockchain financial services should effectively fulfill their anti-money laundering obligations and integrate FATF and domestic regulations of various countries to do their compliance work; enterprises involved in blockchain financial transactions should pay close attention to the criminal risks of financial transactions, establish and improve criminal compliance for financial and securities crimes; domestic and foreign enterprises involved in the development of blockchain smart contracts should actively promote the integration of corporate criminal compliance and blockchain code. By improving the regulation and rules of blockchain both internally and externally, and prompting the criminal law to respond positively to blockchain financial crimes, it will help to better promote innovation in the field of blockchain finance and help Chinas digital economy to move steadily and far.

Abstract:By virtue of the blockchain technology, smart contracts in transactions are presentable in the form of code, thereby fulfilling the contract in an automatized and irreversible approach, transcending the traditional contract model. The theory of self-help act and the theory of agency, which are deemed as an external reinforcement to the course of the contracts execution, are only a side explanation in a legal term that fails to grasp the essence. A smart contract does not necessarily cover the entire process of a contract, and instead, it perhaps simply constitutes an aspect or a stage of the contract. The smart contract in legal sense is not a new contract type, but a new development of contractual relationship, i.e., a new form to close and fulfil a contract by the parties concerned, whereas the nature of contract remains unchanged. Smart contract meeting specific requirements will constitute a special written form, which has the characteristics of written form + automatic performance. When the civil subjects sign a contract by means of a smart contract, they should abide by the Civil Code and the relevant existing laws to ensure the legitimate establishment and validity of the contract. A smart contract is inequivalent to a contract with legal force, so the validity of it should be analyzed in specific scenarios during its application. For the sake of a long-term development of the smart contract, we should establish it in legislation, as well as compile and apply it in compliance with the current laws and policies to legalize the form and standardize the content of it. During the startup age of the technology, paper contract, general electronic contract and smart contract are functioning in tandem with one another in varying scenarios. This will become a principal status for civil contact and business transaction in the future.

Abstract:With the development of the digital copyright times,?the dissemination of works has become more flexible and faster.?Traditional copyright registration has difficulties in practical application due to the disadvantages of high registration cost, different standards and privacy disclosure. The emergence of blockchain technology provides a new way to promote the development of copyright registration.?While blockchain technology is utilized into copyright registration, its decentralization can reduce the cost of registration, its distributed mechanism can unify the standards of registration, and its incredible tamper-resistance can enhance the certification of registration.?Meanwhile, blockchain technology establishes a new copyright trust mechanism based on its own characteristics, which can not only clearly distribute copyright profit, but also promote the development of the copyright market to maximize the inherent value of copyright.?In the integration of blockchain technology and copyright registration, there will be some technical problems difficult to solve. It is impossible to accurately judge the originality of works and to play the publicity of the copyright system. In order to achieve the coordinative development of technology and law, it is essential to create actively copyright registration rules and to set up a unified regulation to prevent the abuse of blockchain technology.

Abstract:Blockchain technology has been closely related to finance since it came into being. As a new technical combination, it is penetrating into different financial scenarios. The development of blockchain has changed the traditional financial operating model, and greatly impacted the financial risk management and the existing legal system. The high degree of anonymity and decentralized trading of financial derivatives in blockchain hinders the collection of information by regulators, makes it difficult to ensure the accuracy and comprehensiveness of information, thus leads to a regulatory gap in some industries, and makes room for crime. Therefore, the criminal law regulation on financial derivatives can maintain the stability of the national currency, guard against financial risks, and prevent induced crime, which is necessary. In blockchain, there are three theories about the attributes of the financial derivatives of blockchain: being currency, being financial instrument and being property. By comparing the legal policies of blockchain financial derivatives in Germany, the United States, Japan and Russia, combined with domestic blockchain financial derivatives trading practice, it is mainly used as financial instruments, so it sounds more reasonable to identify blockchain financial derivatives as financial instruments. Financial derivatives trading in blockchain involves criminal law interests such as the security of financial transactions and financial management and the property security of financial investors. We can prevent the crime of financial derivatives trading in blockchain and promote its healthy development on the track of the rule of law only by taking criminal policies as the guidance, basing on reality and looking forward to the future, taking criminal laws as the basis, persisting in the combination of prevention and control risks and promoting technological development, taking criminal compliance as the assistance, establishing a system and mechanism of punishment and non-punishment, and building a three-dimensional regulation system.