阿什福德

2023年3月1日

感谢我们在阿什福德的朋友分享这个案例研究检查如果软件开发人员有责任照顾终端用户,概述了最近的案件与郁金香。cryptocurrency地区人们工作或兴趣可能还记得,去年郁金香贸易有限公司(“郁金香”)带来了对16个核心开发人员,认为他们欠郁金香的注意义务,因此必须给郁金香访问111000比特币的比特币网络,这些开发人员监督。郁金香背后的人是克雷格莱特博士声称他是比特币的发明家,Satoshi Nakamoto。第一个实例法官驳回索赔郁金香声称他们拥有的比特币(40亿美元在2021年4月),但他们无法再访问资产由于私有密钥比特币已经失去了由于克雷格的电脑黑客。他们想开发人员部署一个补丁可以绕过私钥和郁金香的比特币移到另一个地址,郁金香可以访问。郁金香这样的请求的主要理由是,由于开发人员控制了网络,他们欠受托责任(或注意义务)郁金香为真正的所有者的资产,因此他们必须保护和维护郁金香的资产。郁金香的说法被一审法官驳回了。福尔克J得出结论,没有建立的现实可能性,事实承认违反受托人侵权行为的责任被告所欠郁金香。上诉法庭本月早些时候郁金香的吸引力是允许上诉案件的上诉法院颁发的明年。法庭没有说这是受托责任在法律上但认为尝试提出了一个严重的问题。 In its assessment, the Court highlighted that the developers’ role has some elements that point towards the characteristics of fiduciary duties, such as: A significant amount of control and decision making power for and on other people’s behalf in relation to their property; The existence of an “entrustment” in the developers; and A legitimate expectation from bitcoin owners that the developers will not exercise their authority in their own self-interest to the detriment of owners and will act in good faith to fix bugs or faults in the software. A big case to watch What makes this development significant is currently blockchain developers have no explicit duty of care to the end users, including owners of the cryptoassets. The hearing will examine that very position. Some of the crucial questions expected to be discussed at the hearing are: Is bitcoin/cryptoasset property? The legal status of cryptoassets remains unclear under English laws. Some consider them property (albeit digital assets cannot be “possessed”) while some regard them as a token which may not be property itself. Whatever the conclusion will be, it is expected to help clarify this legal point. What control do developers have over the networks or the digital assets, and to what extent? This will go straight to the heart of the decentralised network concept. If the facts show that decentralised governance is merely a debunked “myth”, then it will significantly impact the treatment of digital assets and any other products underpinned by blockchain technology. What duty of care do the developers owe to the true owners of the digital assets (if they do indeed have the required level of control over those assets)? If the court confirms on this point, developers, and any other network participants having the same or similar level of control, may see themselves facing various tortious claims by the owners. Regulators may also step in to regulate the conduct of these individuals or the governance of the relevant networks. Being the first of its kind, the decision of next year’s hearing is expected to shed some light onto some legal ambiguities in the digital assets and blockchain area. Editorial Month