Journal of Digital Technologies and Law

Advanced search

Risks and Prospects of Creativity Tokenization

EDN: xhasaw

Full Text:


Objective: tokenization of creativity, alongside with cryptoeconomy and Web3 network infrastructure, is a notable trend in the development of modern society in the third decade of the 21st century. The objective of this article is to explore the risks and prospects emerging in the process of disposition of the creative labor results in the form of non-fungible tokens.

Methods: the research methodology is based on analysis of varied viewpoints on the problem, including diametrically opposing concepts. The opposing views of the observers manifest their attitude to tokenization of creative products as a speculative scheme, on the one hand, and a promising tool of creative industries development, on the other.

Results: the probable negative consequences of tokenization of intellectual activity results are identified; author’s recommendations on managing these risks are given. Another result of this publication is analysis of economiclegal prospects stemming from tokenization of the objects of copyright and neighboring rights by the example of musical pieces.

Scientific novelty: it consists in presenting and substantiating a hypothesis that the relations formed in the musical industry under the modern sociocultural and technological realities will be reproduced in other creative industries. Also, scientific novelty consists in the analysis of prospects of tokenization of such results of intellectual activity as gaming artifacts, works of traditional and digital visual arts, patents and scientific achievements. The use of nonfungible tokens the ecosystem of network computer games will allow gamers to buy and sell rights to game pieces autonomously from game publishers. Tokenization of industrial property objects and individualization means will ensure protection of intellectual rights of their authors while waiting for the issuance of a state protection document. In the modern society, there will be many of those wishing to become an owner of a token for a scientific work, as the popularity of science and innovations is constantly growing in developed countries. Ownership of a token for a scientific work will be regarded a moral investment, increasing the prestige and status of its owner. Tokens for scientific works have a high potential as a means of measuring value in a post-economic society.

Practical significance: it consists in the description of innovative means of using creative products and business models based on tokenization of the results of intellectual activity, ready to be implemented in practice.

About the Author

R. A. Budnik
National Research University “Higher School of Economics“; Shenzhen MSU-BIT University
Russian Federation

Ruslan A. Budnik – Doctor of Juridical Sciences, Professor, Deputy Director of International scientific-educational center “UNESCO Chair of Copyright, Neighboring, Cultural and Information Rights”, National Research University “Higher School of Economics”; Professor at Russian-Chinese Center for comparative legal science, Shenzhen MSU-BIT University

Scopus Author ID:
Web of Science Researcher ID:

Google Scholar ID:

РИНЦ Author ID:

3 Bolshoy Trekhsvyatitelskiy pereulok, 436, 101000 Moscow

No. 1, International University Park Road, Dayun New Town, Longgang District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, PRC, 518172

Competing Interests:

The author is a member of the Editorial Board of the Journal; the article has been reviewed on general terms


1. Ayres, C. E. (1962). The Theory of Economic Progress: a Study of the Fundamentals of Economic Development and Cultural Change. Schocken Books.

2. Bamakan, S. M. H., Nezhadsistani, N., Bodaghi, O., & Qu, Q. (2022). Patents and intellectual property assets as non-fungible tokens; key technologies and challenges. Sci Rep, 12, 2178. 022-05920-6

3. Chey, H.-K. (2022). Cryptocurrencies and the IPE of money: an agenda for research. Review of International Political Economy, 1–16.

4. Colicev, A. (2023). How can non-fungible tokens bring value to brands. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 40(1), 30–37.

5. Commons, J. R. (1959). Institutional economics: its place in political economy. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

6. Far, S. B., Bamakan, S. M. H., Qu, Q., & Jiang, Q. (2022). A Review of Non-fungible Tokens Applications in the Realworld and Metaverse. Procedia Computer Science, 214, 755–762.

7. Gioia, T. (2019). Music: a subversive history. Basic Books. Goel, A. K., Bakshi, R., & Agrawal, K. K. (2022). Web 3.0 and decentralized applications. Materials Proceedings, 10(1), 8.

8. Hale, R. L. (1952). Freedom Through Law. Public Control of Private Governing Power. Columbia University Press.

9. Henry, C. (Ed.). (2007). Entrepreneurship in the creative industries: An international perspective. Edward Elgar Publishing.

10. Hilko, M. R. (2021). Disrupting Copyright. How Disruptive Innovations and Social Norms are Challenging IP Law. Taylor & Francis.

11. Jelil, S. N. (2022). Non-Fungible Tokens, Crypto-Assets and Web3: What’s in It for Conservation Science? http://

12. Kraizberg, E. (2023). Non-fungible tokens: a bubble or the end of an era of intellectual property rights. Financial Innovation, 9, 32.

13. Michalski, R., Jankowski, J., & Kazienko, P. (2012, November). Negative effects of incentivised viral campaigns for activity in social networks. In 2012 Second International Conference on Cloud and Green Computing Xiangtan, China (pp. 391–398).

14. Momtaz, P. P. (2022). Some very simple economics of Web3 and the Metaverse. FinTech, 1(3), 225–234. https://

15. Murray, A., Kim, D., & Combs, J. (2023). The promise of a decentralized internet: What is Web3 and how can firms prepare? Business Horizons, 66(2), 191–202.

16. Okediji, R. L. (Ed.). (2017). Copyright law in an age of limitations and exceptions. Cambridge University Press.

17. Petcu, A., Pahontu, B., Frunzete, M., & Stoichescu, D. A. (2023). A Secure and Decentralized Authentication Mechanism Based on Web 3.0 and Ethereum Blockchain Technology. Applied Sciences, 13(4), 2231. https://

18. Santiago, J. M. (2017). The «Blurred Lines» of Copyright Law: Setting a New Standard for Copyright Infringement in Music. Brooklyn Law Review, 83(1).

19. Scharfman, J. (2023). The Cryptocurrency and Digital Asset Fraud Casebook. Springer International Publishing.

20. Walker, W. (2022). The Definitive Guide to NFT Investing. Learn to Profit From the NFT, Metaverse, and Crypto Gaming Connection. PublishDrive.

21. Wilson, K. B., Karg, A., & Ghaderi, H. (2022). Prospecting non-fungible tokens in the digital economy: Stakeholders and ecosystem, risk and opportunity. Business Horizons, 65(5), 657–670. bushor.2021.10.007

22. Yue, Y., Li, X., Zhang, D., & Wang, S. (2021). How cryptocurrency affects economy? A network analysis using bibliometric methods. International Review of Financial Analysis, 77, 101869. irfa.2021.101869


For citations:

Budnik R.A. Risks and Prospects of Creativity Tokenization. Journal of Digital Technologies and Law. 2023;1(3):587-611. EDN: xhasaw

Views: 199

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

ISSN 2949-2483 (Online)