(Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany

Simple item page
dc.contributor.advisorNcube, Caroline
dc.contributor.authorPapiernick, Maik
dc.date.accessioned2025-03-27T11:10:53Z
dc.date.available2025-03-27T11:10:53Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.date.updated2025-03-27T11:06:57Z
dc.description.abstractIn contrast to other applications that use blockchain (such as non-fungible tokens/NFTs or smart contracts, which I will not discuss), cryptocurrencies are the most widespread in society - and are already official currency in El Salvador, for example. Due to this new type of technology (blockchain), cryptocurrencies can hardly be categorised in existing legal categories. This is why it is also difficult to establish rights to cryptocurrencies. I would like to address this problem in my master's thesis: What (intellectual) property rights can there be to cryptocurrencies? Such rights could be necessary to protect the holder of cryptocurrencies. I will focus on two categories of rights in particular: Intellectual property rights and the private law understanding of property (which is usually on tangible things). At the beginning, I shed light on the technical background of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology, explain the most important terms and present an example transaction. I then turn to the common generic term of intellectual property rights and private law property: property. First, I examine what is meant by property - first on a philosophical level, then on to the constitutional understanding and individual areas of law in South Africa and Germany. It is noticeable that there are already regulations on cryptocurrencies in some selected areas - but these do not necessarily allow any conclusions to be drawn as to whether (intellectual) property rights to cryptocurrencies exist. Therefore, I analyse the existing intellectual property rights (including copyright and database right) and also discuss a possible sui generis right to cryptocurrencies. Furthermore, I turn to an extension of the private law understanding of property in South Africa and Germany - in particular the question of whether things that fall under the private law understanding of property must necessarily be tangible (and if it is possible to change requirements for private law property in South Africa and Germany). After all, cryptocurrencies could be similar to tangible objects rather than intangible objects. Finally, I will briefly discuss other jurisdictions such as the USA, UK or Singapore with regard to the question of whether a (private law) property right to cryptocurrencies exists. I then summarise my findings in a conclusion.
dc.identifier.apacitationPapiernick, M. (2024). <i>(Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany</i>. (). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Department of Commercial Law. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275en_ZA
dc.identifier.chicagocitationPapiernick, Maik. <i>"(Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany."</i> ., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Department of Commercial Law, 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275en_ZA
dc.identifier.citationPapiernick, M. 2024. (Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany. . University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Department of Commercial Law. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275en_ZA
dc.identifier.ris TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Papiernick, Maik AB - In contrast to other applications that use blockchain (such as non-fungible tokens/NFTs or smart contracts, which I will not discuss), cryptocurrencies are the most widespread in society - and are already official currency in El Salvador, for example. Due to this new type of technology (blockchain), cryptocurrencies can hardly be categorised in existing legal categories. This is why it is also difficult to establish rights to cryptocurrencies. I would like to address this problem in my master's thesis: What (intellectual) property rights can there be to cryptocurrencies? Such rights could be necessary to protect the holder of cryptocurrencies. I will focus on two categories of rights in particular: Intellectual property rights and the private law understanding of property (which is usually on tangible things). At the beginning, I shed light on the technical background of cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology, explain the most important terms and present an example transaction. I then turn to the common generic term of intellectual property rights and private law property: property. First, I examine what is meant by property - first on a philosophical level, then on to the constitutional understanding and individual areas of law in South Africa and Germany. It is noticeable that there are already regulations on cryptocurrencies in some selected areas - but these do not necessarily allow any conclusions to be drawn as to whether (intellectual) property rights to cryptocurrencies exist. Therefore, I analyse the existing intellectual property rights (including copyright and database right) and also discuss a possible sui generis right to cryptocurrencies. Furthermore, I turn to an extension of the private law understanding of property in South Africa and Germany - in particular the question of whether things that fall under the private law understanding of property must necessarily be tangible (and if it is possible to change requirements for private law property in South Africa and Germany). After all, cryptocurrencies could be similar to tangible objects rather than intangible objects. Finally, I will briefly discuss other jurisdictions such as the USA, UK or Singapore with regard to the question of whether a (private law) property right to cryptocurrencies exists. I then summarise my findings in a conclusion. DA - 2024 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town KW - Law LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2024 T1 - (Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany TI - (Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275 ER - en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275
dc.identifier.vancouvercitationPapiernick M. (Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany. []. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Law ,Department of Commercial Law, 2024 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/41275en_ZA
dc.language.rfc3066Eng
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Commercial Law
dc.publisher.facultyFaculty of Law
dc.publisher.institutionUniversity of Cape Town
dc.subjectLaw
dc.title(Intellectual) Property Rights on Cryptocurrency A comparison between the legal situation in South Africa and Germany
dc.typeThesis / Dissertation
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
dc.type.qualificationlevelMasters
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
thesis_law_2024_papiernick maik.pdf
Size:
2.87 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.72 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Masters