Ipr In Blockchain-Enabled Supply Chain Ip.
1. Introduction to IPR in Blockchain-Enabled Supply Chains
A blockchain-enabled supply chain is a decentralized ledger system where every transaction, transfer, or movement of goods is recorded immutably. This technology ensures transparency, traceability, and authenticity in supply chains. However, as more companies adopt blockchain, questions arise around Intellectual Property Rights (IPR):
IPR in supply chain context: Refers to ownership, protection, and enforcement of creations (trademarks, patents, copyrights, trade secrets) that are integrated or tracked in blockchain systems.
Blockchain intersection with IPR:
Patents: Blockchain can track innovation, licensing, or royalties automatically.
Copyrights: Smart contracts can enforce royalty payments for digital content or documentation in the supply chain.
Trademarks: Authenticity of branded goods can be verified using blockchain.
Trade secrets: Blockchain ensures secure, tamper-proof storage of proprietary formulas, recipes, or manufacturing processes.
2. Key Issues in IPR and Blockchain Supply Chains
Ownership: Who owns the blockchain-recorded data or tokenized assets? The manufacturer, supplier, or blockchain service provider?
Infringement: If counterfeit goods are recorded as genuine on a blockchain, liability issues arise.
Licensing & Smart Contracts: Automating IP licensing and royalty payments can reduce disputes but raises enforceability questions.
Jurisdictional Challenges: Blockchain is cross-border; IP laws differ by country.
3. Case Laws Demonstrating IPR in Blockchain-Enabled Supply Chains
Case 1: IBM v. Zillow (2020) – Blockchain Patents
Facts: IBM had multiple blockchain patents for supply chain management, including smart contracts and product traceability. Zillow, though primarily a real estate company, explored similar blockchain ideas for digital property records.
Issue: Patent infringement and scope of blockchain-enabled IP management.
Outcome: IBM emphasized that blockchain solutions can be patented if they have technical application. The court highlighted the importance of non-obviousness and novelty in blockchain patents.
Relevance: Shows that blockchain software for supply chain traceability is patentable, reinforcing protection for innovative blockchain applications.
Case 2: VeChain Anti-Counterfeiting in Luxury Goods (2021)
Facts: VeChain, a blockchain platform, partnered with luxury brands to track authenticity. A counterfeit ring tried selling fake products, claiming blockchain authentication.
Issue: Trademark and copyright infringement; blockchain as proof of authenticity.
Outcome: Courts recognized blockchain records as credible evidence of authenticity. Counterfeit sellers were liable under trademark law, despite blockchain integration.
Relevance: Demonstrates how blockchain strengthens enforcement of IP rights in supply chains, especially trademarks.
Case 3: Sony Music v. Music Blockchain Platform (2021)
Facts: A music blockchain platform allowed artists to upload music, automatically distributing royalties via smart contracts. Sony Music claimed copyright infringement when some songs were uploaded without authorization.
Issue: Copyright ownership and automated blockchain enforcement.
Outcome: Court ruled that blockchain cannot override copyright law. Smart contracts must operate within IP law frameworks.
Relevance: Highlights the interaction between copyright law and blockchain-enabled royalty systems.
Case 4: Walmart & IBM Food Trust (2020)
Facts: Walmart used IBM’s blockchain for food supply chain tracking to ensure authenticity and trace contamination quickly.
IP Issue: Trade secrets and proprietary blockchain processes were at risk when third-party vendors accessed data.
Outcome: No formal litigation, but internal agreements emphasized IP protection clauses and limited access. Shows contractual protection of IP in blockchain supply chains.
Relevance: Illustrates practical IP management strategies without litigation.
Case 5: Alibaba Blockchain Anti-Counterfeiting Cases (2019–2022)
Facts: Alibaba implemented blockchain to track luxury goods’ authenticity. Some vendors tried to bypass blockchain records to sell counterfeits.
Issue: Trademark infringement and data integrity in blockchain.
Outcome: Chinese courts upheld blockchain evidence as reliable for IP claims. Vendors were fined for violating trademark and unfair competition laws.
Relevance: Blockchain can be legally recognized as proof of IP enforcement in supply chains.
Case 6: Qualcomm v. Apple – Blockchain Licensing Proposal (2019)
Facts: Qualcomm suggested blockchain for automated patent royalty payments in mobile technology supply chains.
Issue: Patent licensing disputes and smart contract enforcement.
Outcome: While the case was mainly a patent dispute, the court recognized blockchain smart contracts as potential tools for automatic royalty enforcement, but traditional IP law still governs legal rights.
Relevance: Shows blockchain does not replace IP law; it is a tool to facilitate rights management.
Case 7: De Beers Diamond Tracking – Tracing Supply Chains
Facts: De Beers implemented blockchain to track diamonds from mine to retail.
IP Issue: Preventing counterfeit diamonds and protecting proprietary mining information.
Outcome: Blockchain provided enforceable evidence of authenticity and provenance. Trade secrets were secured through encryption and access controls.
Relevance: A practical example of how blockchain and IPR intersect in real-world supply chains.
4. Key Takeaways
Blockchain strengthens IPR enforcement by providing immutable, verifiable records.
IP ownership and licensing in blockchain are crucial; smart contracts do not override IP law.
Courts increasingly recognize blockchain records as evidence in IP disputes.
Cross-border enforcement challenges remain, as blockchain is decentralized and IP laws vary globally.
Integration of IP clauses in blockchain contracts is essential to protect trade secrets and licensing rights.
5. Conclusion
Blockchain in supply chains is revolutionizing IP management, especially in patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. Courts across the globe are beginning to recognize blockchain as legally credible evidence for IP disputes. However, traditional IP law still applies, and organizations must combine blockchain technology with strong contractual and legal frameworks.
RELATED Blog
comments