Ipr In Blockchain Ip In Supply Chain Management.
1. INTRODUCTION
Blockchain technology has emerged as a transformative tool in supply chain management (SCM) by enabling transparency, traceability, immutability, and automation. Industries such as pharmaceuticals, food, logistics, luxury goods, and manufacturing increasingly rely on blockchain-based systems to track goods, authenticate products, prevent counterfeiting, and automate transactions through smart contracts.
However, blockchain-based supply chains generate and rely upon valuable intellectual property (IP), raising complex legal questions concerning ownership, protection, enforcement, and liability. Traditional intellectual property regimes—patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets—must now be applied to decentralized and often cross-border blockchain systems.
2. ROLE OF IPR IN BLOCKCHAIN-BASED SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT
Blockchain in SCM involves multiple IP-protected elements:
(a) Patents
Blockchain-based traceability systems
Anti-counterfeiting authentication methods
Cold-chain monitoring algorithms
Consensus mechanisms adapted for logistics networks
(b) Copyright
Blockchain source code
Smart contracts governing supply transactions
Supply chain dashboards and software interfaces
(c) Trade Secrets
Supplier data
Pricing mechanisms
Inventory optimization algorithms
(d) Trademarks
Blockchain-verified certification marks
Brand authenticity indicators
(e) Database Rights
Structured provenance and logistics data stored on distributed ledgers
3. LEGAL ISSUES ARISING IN BLOCKCHAIN SUPPLY CHAINS
Ownership of blockchain-generated data
Authorship of smart contracts
Patentability of blockchain-based logistics solutions
Admissibility of blockchain records as evidence
Protection of confidential supply chain information
These issues have been addressed indirectly by courts in various jurisdictions, creating precedents applicable to supply chain use cases.
4. CASE LAWS (DETAILED ANALYSIS)
CASE 1: Tencent Holdings Ltd. v. Shenzhen Yunsilv Technology Co. Ltd. (2018)
Court: Hangzhou Internet Court, China
Facts:
Tencent alleged copyright infringement for unauthorized reproduction of its digital content. Tencent relied on blockchain-based evidence to establish ownership and the time of creation of the copyrighted work.
Legal Issue:
Whether blockchain-stored evidence can be accepted as valid proof of intellectual property ownership.
Judgment:
The court recognized blockchain technology as a reliable method of evidence preservation, emphasizing its features of decentralization, timestamping, and resistance to tampering.
Significance for Supply Chain Management:
This case validates blockchain as a tool to prove ownership of IP assets such as product designs, software systems, and authentication records used in supply chain operations.
CASE 2: Hangzhou Huatai Yimei Culture Media Co. Ltd. v. Shenzhen Daotong Technology Co. Ltd. (2018)
Court: Hangzhou Internet Court, China
Facts:
The plaintiff used blockchain technology to record the creation and dissemination of digital works and sued for copyright infringement.
Legal Issue:
Whether blockchain records can establish priority and authorship of intellectual property.
Judgment:
The court upheld the evidentiary value of blockchain records, stating that they satisfy legal requirements of authenticity and integrity.
Relevance to SCM:
Helps establish priority for packaging designs, software tools, and logistics platforms, preventing IP theft across complex supply networks.
CASE 3: AA v. Persons Unknown (2019)
Court: High Court of England and Wales
Facts:
A ransomware attack involved Bitcoin payments recorded on a blockchain. The claimant sought an injunction over the crypto-assets.
Legal Issue:
Whether assets recorded on a blockchain constitute property under law.
Judgment:
The court held that crypto-assets are a form of property capable of being protected by law.
Importance for Supply Chains:
This recognition extends to tokenized supply chain assets, including blockchain-based IP licenses, digital warehouse receipts, and provenance tokens.
CASE 4: B2C Consulting Services Ltd. v. Quoine Pte Ltd. (2020)
Court: Singapore Court of Appeal
Facts:
A dispute arose over automated trading contracts executed through coded systems.
Legal Issue:
Whether smart contracts are legally enforceable.
Judgment:
The court ruled that smart contracts are legally binding if contractual intent and agreement can be inferred from the code.
SCM Implications:
Smart contracts used to automate licensing of patented technologies, royalty payments, and distribution rights in supply chains are enforceable under IP law.
CASE 5: Tulip Trading Ltd. v. Bitcoin Association & Others (2022)
Court: Court of Appeal, United Kingdom
Facts:
Tulip Trading claimed that blockchain developers owed fiduciary duties to restore access to lost digital assets.
Legal Issue:
Whether blockchain developers have legal obligations related to control and governance of blockchain systems.
Judgment:
The court allowed the claim to proceed, recognizing potential legal duties of developers.
Relevance to Supply Chain Blockchains:
Clarifies accountability of consortium blockchain developers who manage IP-heavy supply chain platforms.
CASE 6: Oracle America, Inc. v. Google LLC (2021)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Facts:
Dispute over copyright infringement involving software APIs.
Legal Issue:
Whether software interfaces are protected by copyright.
Judgment:
While recognizing copyrightability, the court applied fair use principles.
SCM Relevance:
Blockchain supply chain platforms rely heavily on APIs; this case influences how interoperability and copyright protection are balanced.
5. IMPACT OF CASE LAW ON SUPPLY CHAIN IP PROTECTION
Courts increasingly accept blockchain-generated evidence.
Smart contracts are treated as legally enforceable instruments.
Blockchain-based assets are recognized as property.
Developers and consortium members may incur legal responsibility.
IP protection must be embedded at the design stage of supply chain blockchains.
6. CONCLUSION
Intellectual Property Rights play a crucial role in regulating blockchain-based supply chain management systems. While blockchain enhances transparency and trust, it also amplifies legal risks related to ownership, infringement, and confidentiality. Judicial decisions across jurisdictions demonstrate a gradual integration of blockchain technology into existing IP frameworks.
As blockchain adoption in supply chain management expands, robust IP governance, clear contractual allocation of rights, and legally compliant system design will be essential to ensure sustainable and enforceable innovation.
RELATED Blog
comments