Web3 Law Popularization丨NFT digital collection rights protection has become a trend, which behaviors will step on the pit?

The digital collection industry has been up and down for more than a year, and major platforms are exploring their own platform positioning and main ways to play. However, regardless of the development trend of the industry, the relationship between the platform side and the user side of the digital collection industry seems to have always stayed in the cold winter period of the industry last year, and the trust foundation of the two sides is extremely weak. If you don’t agree with each other, you can defend your rights.

The regulatory red line of many games and activities in the digital collection industry is not yet clear, and the positive development of the industry is inseparable from the efforts of each party. For digital collection platforms that do have illegal behaviors and damage the industry ecology, the process of user rights protection is precisely the process of regulating the development of the industry. However, in the process of protecting rights, it is still necessary to protect rights rationally, grasp the direction and proportion, so as to effectively protect their legitimate rights and interests, and avoid unnecessary troubles to themselves.

Therefore, this article will talk about the pitfalls that platform users avoid when they properly protect their rights, and how platform bosses deal with irrational rights protection.

01The difference between legitimate rights protection and irrational rights protection

To determine whether it is a legitimate rights protection, the following three main aspects can be considered:

1. Whether the motive for rights protection is legitimate

The motive for rights protection, that is, whether the purpose of rights protection deviates from the real dispute between the two parties, is to protect their own rights and interests, or is it purely for the sake of claims, such as professional anti-counterfeiters in the food industry.

2. Whether the means of protecting rights are legal

The means of rights protection shall be carried out without affecting the lawful rights and interests of the other party or a third party, and without violating laws and regulations, and must not be carried out in the form of fabricating reasons, fabricating evidence, or providing false information.

3. Whether the basis for rights protection is sufficient

The basis for rights protection refers to whether there is a basis for the creation of rights and whether the scope of rights is necessary and equivalent. Whether the claims put forward have a certain factual basis or legal basis, or are they delusional or fabricated claims, such as “hush money”, etc.

02 Key points for legitimate rights protection and avoiding stepping on pits

If the law does not prohibit it, it can be done. As long as the means of protecting the rights of users do not infringe on the legitimate rights and interests of others and do not violate laws and regulations, it is an effective way to protect rights and interests. To put it simply, the current means of rights protection in the digital collection industry mainly include the following: complaints and reports, private negotiation and communication, civil prosecution, criminal accusations, etc.

There are various means and ways, and which way to choose can better achieve the expected effect and effectively make up for personal losses needs to be comprehensively considered in combination with the details of the platform’s operation. However, in the process of rights protection, it is necessary to avoid stepping on the following pitfalls.

1. Blindly following the herd

In the digital collection industry, it is not uncommon for a user to play several platforms at the same time, and users are also well versed in the circles of each platform. And the gameplay and routines of these platforms, when studied carefully, are also similar, nothing more than replacement, synthesis, lottery, new recruitment, etc. Moreover, there are also some digital collection platforms that have been criminally filed, providing a boost to users’ rights protection.

Under the demand of the industry, professional rights protection households have also been prompted, and professional households are armed with familiar three-board axes: once they lose money, they are false propaganda on the platform, fund-raising fraud, and rat warehouses. However, the establishment background, business details, and IP publicity of each platform are different.

The successful case of the platform being filed does not mean that these materials can be completely copied and applied. Sometimes, the materials provided by users do not conform to the actual situation of the platform, blindly emphasizing “fraud, rat warehouse, and pyramid scheme (commonly used CX in the industry)”, each of which seems to be powerful and fatal, but each of them does not fall to the point, but blurs the focus of the investigation of the relevant departments, and also hinders the progress of the investigation.

2. Lack of Legal Awareness

Legality is the cornerstone of rights protection. The first step in rights protection is to first clarify the basic facts of the infringement of rights and interests, and after having a basic judgment of the existence of infringement, and determine the appropriate remedies that need to be adopted in combination with the purpose of rights protection to be achieved. For example, giving the tax office clues about fraud and CX obviously won’t work.

Secondly, it is necessary to collect and retain relevant evidence based on the relevant circumstances of the dispute between the two parties. No matter what kind of rights protection method is adopted, you need to have materials to support your claim. Rights protection activities without evidence are often unconvincing and may even lead to damage to individuals’ own rights and interests.

3. Too aggressive

In order to attract the attention of the platform, some digital collection users have adopted some extremely radical means to protect their rights in the process of rights protection, which often leads to the escalation of the situation and completely shatters the possible basis for negotiation and settlement between the two parties.

In addition, some users threaten the platform by “taking the lead in rights protection”, claiming a compensation amount far beyond the actual situation. For the purpose of illegal possession, users may be suspected of the crime of extortion by publishing relevant content, taking the lead in protecting rights, etc., causing psychological coercion to the platform party, so as to obtain property that should not be obtained.

03Legal risks of irrational rights protection

The rights protection of digital collections is often a mass event, and after the emergence of a rights protection, a rights protection group is usually quickly formed in a short period of time, and hundreds of rights protection users are gathered. The composition of these dozens or hundreds of rights defenders is also quite complex, with some taking the lead in attacking, some supporting, and more taking a wait-and-see attitude, waiting for the positive group to make substantial progress before joining.

In order to mobilize the enthusiasm of other users, some personnel may adopt irrational methods such as human flesh exposure, personal attacks, insults and abuse, fabricating facts related to the platform, and gathering crowds to make trouble, which not only affects the normal operation of the digital collection platform, but also may bring serious distress to the physical and mental life of the main personnel of the platform. Here’s a brief look at some of the most common radical behaviors and responses:

1. Legal Risks of Insulting and Abusive

The company and its main personnel enjoy the right to reputation in accordance with the law and are not infringed upon by anyone. The right to reputation of others must not be infringed upon by any organization or individual by means such as insult or slander. In the event that the User abuses and insults the Company’s personnel or commits commercial slander, the Platform may, in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China, require the infringer to bear the responsibilities of stopping the infringement, eliminating the impact, restoring the reputation, making a formal apology, and compensating for losses. In addition, insulting and slandering company personnel may also be suspected of violating Article 42 of the Public Security Administration Punishment Law of the People’s Republic of China, and face penalties such as detention and fines.

2. Legal Risks of Falsifying Facts

In the industry, there are still some users who no longer consider making up for their losses, and all kinds of behaviors are just to send the platform boss to “eat the national meal and bring a silver bracelet”. They often have long-standing grievances and deep contradictions with the platform, but they are unable to speak alone, so they deliberately fabricate and fabricate some fictitious platform situations to gather rights protection users, and call on users who do not know why to jointly report the case based on these unverified and unsubstantiated materials.

This kind of behavior may be punished by detention or fines for violating Article 42, Paragraph 3 of the “Law of the People’s Republic of China on Public Security Administration Punishments” for “fabricating facts to falsely accuse and frame others in an attempt to make others subject to criminal responsibility or public security administrative punishment”; at worst, they may be suspected of the crime of false accusation and framing as provided for in Article 243 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China, which not only infringes upon the legitimate rights of citizens, but also seriously affects the normal activities of judicial organs.

3. Legal Risks of Gathering a Crowd to Make Trouble

In addition, due to policy considerations, industry inertia and other reasons, most digital collection platforms have chosen Hainan as their registered office address.

Relying on the openness and transparency of the company’s basic industrial and commercial information, a number of digital collection users organized crowds to make a disturbance in the office of the platform, causing serious disorder in public places, or destroying property in a state of emotional excess, resulting in physical conflicts. If the circumstances are heinous, the circumstances are serious, or cause serious public disorder, they may also be suspected of the crime of picking quarrels and provoking troubles as provided for in article 293 of the Criminal Law of the People’s Republic of China.

4. How should the digital collection platform respond?**

When dealing with rights protection matters, digital collection platforms should have a correct mentality, face them positively, and use multiple means to resolve the crisis.

First of all, the platform party needs to have a comprehensive understanding of the trigger for the outbreak of rights protection, the scale of rights protection users, the demands and reasons of rights protection users, and the measures taken by rights protection users.

Secondly, on the basis of a comprehensive understanding of the situation and information obtained through multiple channels, internal self-examination and self-correction are carried out for rights protection incidents, and the overall research and judgment are sorted out to determine whether there are potential risk points and the size of the risk on the platform side, and then analyze the adjustment and solution of existing risks. For platforms that have been investigated by relevant departments, they must not be dealt with with with an ostrich mentality, or hastily fooled things, let alone fabricate the situation of the platform in order to cope with the investigation.

In addition, platforms based on the digital collection industry should also pay attention to industry trends at all times, cautiously carry out business behaviors that are easy to trigger user emotions, and pay attention to the extremely high-risk business behaviors that have been identified by other platforms. The platform party should also establish its own emergency response plan handling mechanism, and formulate the handling process and docking personnel in advance to avoid messing up and intensifying conflicts.

Finally, for irrational rights protection behaviors, the platform party may consider a combination of rigidity and softness to inform irrational rights protection users of the legitimate rights protection channels and the legal consequences of their current actions, including civil, administrative, and criminal legal risks. At the same time, it is recommended that the platform party have a special person responsible for collecting and fixing relevant evidence of infringement, so that when the situation deteriorates, it can use this evidence to protect the rights and interests of the platform and stabilize public order by means such as civil litigation, administrative complaints, and criminal accusations.

04 Mankiw Lawyer Advice

All in all, whether it is the platform or the user, acting within the legal framework is the best way to protect the rights and interests.

In this article, I hope to remind all users of digital collections, if your rights and interests are infringed, please protect your rights rationally, you can call the police, you can sue, you can check the law if you are not clear, you can ask a lawyer, don’t lose a big one because of a small one.

At the same time, it is also a reminder to friends of various digital collection platforms: if users have similar suspected illegal “playing with fire” behaviors in the process of rights protection, and communication is not smooth, they can also directly report to the police.