Non-fungible Token Criminal Regulation: Risk Generation and Imputation Path

In the digital society, addressing the criminal risks associated with Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) is a pressing issue. The challenge lies in preventing the spillover of these risks and establishing clear pathways for criminal responsibility. This involves two primary technical approaches: the "dyeing scheme" and the "ERC standard scheme". To mitigate criminal risks effectively, it is essential to adhere to three guiding principles: prioritizing ethics (with a focus on human-centric approaches), fostering cooperative governance, and integrating technology and management. In terms of prevention strategies, they should be tailored according to these principles. When it comes to delineating paths for criminal responsibility, we must consider two main dimensions: the behavior of individual participants and the actions of platform services. For individual behaviors, criminal risks associated with NFTs, whether as objects or tools, can be logically assigned through the categories of "property crime" and "computer crime". Additionally, the approach to attributing criminal risk for NFTs can draw on the methods used for fungible tokens. Regarding platform services, the criminal liability of platforms should be grounded in the principle of "law of inaction". It is crucial to rigorously assess and define the "technical prevention and control obligation" and the "damage remedy obligation" based on the technical architecture of different platforms. This assessment will help in establishing the limited liability of NFT platforms through the frameworks of real crime of omission and non-real crime of omission.