3 ms·

I'm pretty sure your example doesn't apply to NFTs but am willing to think through it with you. Consider the following counter example: You serve a PNG of you

I'm pretty sure your example doesn't apply to NFTs but am willing to think through it with you. Consider the following counter example: You serve a PNG of your comic character at https://images.munk-a.com/character.png https://images.munk-a.com/character.png. (1) I create a website with some HTML including <img src="https://images.munk-a.com/character.png"/> https://images.munk-a.com/character.png"/>. Did I break a law? (2) I create a JSON document with the text {"url":"https://images.munk-a.com/character.png https://images.munk-a.com/character.png"}. Did I break a law? (3) I create an NFT transaction on a blockchain conforming the ERC-721 specification that contains an optional URL of "https://images.munk-a.com/character.png https://images.munk-a.com/character.png". Did I break a law? As the site operator for images.munk-a.com, do you not have complete control of what is served at path /character.png?

munk-a 5y ago
I am pretty sure, legally speaking that for both 1, 2 and 3 The answer is Yes - but generally nobody cares. I'd briefly clarify that IANAL so take everything with a grain of salt but I suspect that if you publish my email address in a manner to invite harassment without me being a public figure you could be served a take down notice to force its removal - similar things have happened with people publishing the addresses of private individuals. I suspect that if you linked to my favorite picture of me relaxing on the beach in the middle of you describing some truly offensive opinions I'd have a right to disassociate my image from your content. Lastly there's a classic "loophole" (which isn't it's illegal) to get around requiring a liquor license by selling maps to a location where booze can be freely required - I think that's a pretty good mark of precedent that references to things can be equated with the things themselves in the view of the law. If I printed some t-shirts with some notable trademarks on them and didn't offer to sell you one - but did sell you some instructions so that you could pick it up by getting a key out of such-and-such postbox and then opening a safe in the alley behind the parking lot - I'm pretty sure that carries the exact same legal implications as directly selling you a shirt I'd printed without a license.
- politician 5y ago
  Am I correct in understanding your position as saying that a member of the public offering a URL without the explicit permission of site operator may not just be against the site's TOS but may be illegal? If that's the case, then yes, I would agree that using a URL would require permission from the site operator. That would basically bring to a halt the Internet, but yes. In the context of NFTs, it presents a real problem because they are immutable. If the NFT contains a URL that is not authorized or if the authorization is subsequently withdrawn for any reason, then the NFT is tainted but cannot be destroyed. There's probably a start up idea around creating a catalog of tainted and untainted NFTs where regulated entities like Coinbase, OpenSea would pay to determine whether there are any claims against an NFT by a rightsholder. But, if OpenSea isn't implementing a proper DMCA process right now, they're probably an unlikely partner and there's not really a deep moat around that idea anyway.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    I think that most URLs would fall under fair use - generally linked content is being explicitly commented on in the linking content. I'm curious if this has ever gone to court though and I imagine it has.
    - politician 5y ago
      Well, I guess the most I can say is that using URLs is a legal gray area. Some reading material [0] [1] [2] [3]. Thanks for the discussion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_aspects_of_hyperlinking_and_framing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_aspects_of_hyperlink... [1] https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/blogs/internet-law-twists-turns/post/2013-08-09/hyperlinks-are-lawful---unless-you-use-them-unlawfully https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/blogs/internet-law-t... [2] https://btlj.org/data/articles2015/vol16/16_3/16-berkeley-tech-l-j-1273-1344.pdf https://btlj.org/data/articles2015/vol16/16_3/16-berkeley-te... [3] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-02/cp140020en.pdf https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...
      - 5y ago

munk-a 5y ago

I am pretty sure, legally speaking that for both 1, 2 and 3 The answer is Yes - but generally nobody cares. I'd briefly clarify that IANAL so take everything with a grain of salt but I suspect that if you publish my email address in a manner to invite harassment without me being a public figure you could be served a take down notice to force its removal - similar things have happened with people publishing the addresses of private individuals. I suspect that if you linked to my favorite picture of me relaxing on the beach in the middle of you describing some truly offensive opinions I'd have a right to disassociate my image from your content. Lastly there's a classic "loophole" (which isn't it's illegal) to get around requiring a liquor license by selling maps to a location where booze can be freely required - I think that's a pretty good mark of precedent that references to things can be equated with the things themselves in the view of the law. If I printed some t-shirts with some notable trademarks on them and didn't offer to sell you one - but did sell you some instructions so that you could pick it up by getting a key out of such-and-such postbox and then opening a safe in the alley behind the parking lot - I'm pretty sure that carries the exact same legal implications as directly selling you a shirt I'd printed without a license.

politician 5y ago
Am I correct in understanding your position as saying that a member of the public offering a URL without the explicit permission of site operator may not just be against the site's TOS but may be illegal? If that's the case, then yes, I would agree that using a URL would require permission from the site operator. That would basically bring to a halt the Internet, but yes. In the context of NFTs, it presents a real problem because they are immutable. If the NFT contains a URL that is not authorized or if the authorization is subsequently withdrawn for any reason, then the NFT is tainted but cannot be destroyed. There's probably a start up idea around creating a catalog of tainted and untainted NFTs where regulated entities like Coinbase, OpenSea would pay to determine whether there are any claims against an NFT by a rightsholder. But, if OpenSea isn't implementing a proper DMCA process right now, they're probably an unlikely partner and there's not really a deep moat around that idea anyway.
- munk-a 5y ago
  I think that most URLs would fall under fair use - generally linked content is being explicitly commented on in the linking content. I'm curious if this has ever gone to court though and I imagine it has.
  - politician 5y ago
    Well, I guess the most I can say is that using URLs is a legal gray area. Some reading material [0] [1] [2] [3]. Thanks for the discussion. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_aspects_of_hyperlinking_and_framing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_aspects_of_hyperlink... [1] https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/blogs/internet-law-twists-turns/post/2013-08-09/hyperlinks-are-lawful---unless-you-use-them-unlawfully https://www.thompsoncoburn.com/insights/blogs/internet-law-t... [2] https://btlj.org/data/articles2015/vol16/16_3/16-berkeley-tech-l-j-1273-1344.pdf https://btlj.org/data/articles2015/vol16/16_3/16-berkeley-te... [3] https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-02/cp140020en.pdf https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/201...
    - 5y ago