Blockchain circle

One stop hot information platform

About us:

Blockchain circle provides the latest information about blockchain, digital currency, digital wallet, exchange, metauniverse, bitcoin, Ethereum, contract, financial management and so on, and always pays attention to the latest market...

What is the legal effect of blockchain traceability of original products?

Time : 20/07/2022 Author : qc52j1 Click : + -
        As a credit paradigm, blockchain technology is often used to trace the source of various products in recent years. It is generally believed that the blockchain Traceability Technology of products has two advantages:. However, the credibility of blockchain Traceability Technology does not mean that its reality can meet the standard of litigation evidence. This paper aims to discuss the effectiveness and shortcomings of blockchain Traceability Technology in legal relief for your reference. From fresh products that are difficult to preserve to sophisticated electronic products, products usually need to be transported through a complex supply chain before reaching consumers. This is particularly common among multinational enterprises involving multiple jurisdictions, such as suppliers, manufacturers, transporters, storage facilities, distributors and retailers.
 
        Based on the credibility of blockchain's "de trust" and "decentralization", blockchain traceability technology can provide "digital passports" for the above-mentioned projects or transactions in the supply chain, provide "endorsements" for the trade process, and provide a traceable and verifiable audit channel. Once there is a problem with the product, the subject of any link can find the source of the problem through Traceability Technology and prepare effective evidence for filing a lawsuit. With the trend of information on the chain, Chinese laws have gradually recognized the credibility of blockchain evidence in recent years. The provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues concerning the trial of cases by Internet courts, which took effect as early as September 7, 2018, contain relevant content of blockchain evidence, The last paragraph of Article 11 of the provisions states: "if the electronic data submitted by the parties can prove its authenticity through electronic signature, trusted timestamp, hash value verification, blockchain and other evidence collection, fixed and tamper proof technical means, or through the authentication of the electronic forensics depository platform, the Internet court shall confirm it.
 
        ”。 Article 16 of the online litigation rules of the people's court, which was issued by the supreme law and came into force just earlier this month, further gives strong probative force to blockchain evidence: "if the electronic data submitted by the parties as evidence is stored through blockchain technology and is consistent after technical verification, the people's court can determine that the electronic data has not been tampered with after being online, except that there is evidence to the contrary that is sufficient to overturn it.". Then, can online information not be used as evidence in cases that are not applicable to online litigation or Internet courts? The answer is No. although blockchain evidence is not discussed separately in the civil procedure law, the online information can obviously be classified into the scope of electronic data specified in Article 63 of the civil procedure law. Even if the lawsuit is not conducted online, blockchain evidence can better reflect the authenticity of the online information.
 
        In fact, the current obstacle to the application of blockchain technology in judicial proceedings is not the legal provisions, but the strangeness of judges, third-party appraisers or depository institutions to relevant technologies. Therefore, how to better explain the connotation of this technology to the judges is the key in related litigation. As mentioned above, the information on the chain of products can be stored through blockchain technology to ensure that the judicial authorities recognize its authenticity. However, products are physical objects after all, and blockchain Traceability Technology is prone to problems in the process of externalization and specific to products &mdash& mdash; As long as there is human input, there is the possibility of fraud. Some friends often have this misunderstanding: the technical feasibility and guarantee of blockchain traceability are equal to the effectiveness of its associated application scenarios as evidence.
 
        Here, SA Jie's team, as a legal person, must point out that the relevant blockchain evidence cannot meet the high probability standard of proving the source of the product. In other words, when the business is prosecuted for product liability, the uplink information cannot independently prove the source of the product. Taking the traceability of agricultural products as an example, the correlation between technology and products is to stick QR codes on each agricultural product. On the one hand, consumers cannot verify whether the information on the chain is consistent with the real situation; On the other hand, consumers cannot be sure whether the information on the chain embodied by a specific QR code is the information of their corresponding agricultural products. In order to fully verify the authenticity of product information, there is a practice of synchronous video recording in practice, which is sufficient to trace the source and has nothing to do with blockchain technology.
 
        In other words, SA Jie's team believes that blockchain technology traceability is difficult to solve the authenticity problem of products, which at most increases the cost of upstream and downstream counterfeiting in the supply chain to a certain extent. Affected by regulatory policies, the application mode of blockchain technology that can be put into actual operation is limited, and traceability is an important part of the survival of blockchain technology related business models. Although there is still a certain distance between the information chain and the traceability of products in the evidence review standard, compared with the past black box, for consumers, the practice of information chain and inquiry is a major breakthrough in the protection of the right to know. We look forward to the further improvement of the traceability business model. Xiao SA, an in-depth legal service provider of vertical "technology + finance", member of the Appeal Committee of the China Internet Finance Association, director of the China Banking Law Research Association, special researcher of the industrial finance research base of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, part-time tutor of the master of Law School of the China University of political science and law, the first member of the 100 person forum on financial technology and shared finance, special member of the people's venture capital blockchain Research Institute Committee Member of the Drafting Committee of the white paper on China's blockchain Industry issued by the information center of the Ministry of industry and information technology.
 
        He was rated as the best columnist of Weiyang network of Wudaokou School of finance, and columnist of mutual fund news agency, Babbitt, Caixin, securities times, sina finance and Phoenix finance.
 
        
Previous:The original advertisement of the video number is online; Tiktok turns off the "circle" function; "Dune, 2" is officially launched and will be released next year. Geeks know it early
Next:No more

Related articles:



© 2005-2032 | Blockchain Circle & & All Rights Reserved    Sitemap1 Sitemap2 If there is infringement, please contact us at: