The United Kingdom’s government is considering regulating nonfungible tokens (NFTs), but Mintable CEO and founder Zach Burks warns that the proposed regulations may not align with the true nature and potential of NFTs.
In a recent interview with Cointelegraph, Burks expressed his concerns about a report from a U.K. parliamentary committee, which he believes exaggerates the role of NFTs in copyright infringement and fails to recognize their broader utility. Burks emphasized that NFTs are evolving beyond the speculative boom of profile picture NFTs (PFPs) and are now being implemented across various industries for different purposes.
The report, released on October 11 by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, called for government action to protect artists and content creators from copyright infringement related to NFTs. While Burks agrees that protecting copyright and intellectual property rights is crucial, he argues that these issues are not exclusive to NFTs but are inherent to the internet as a whole. Burks highlighted that major internet platforms such as WordPress, YouTube, and Spotify also face copyright infringement challenges and have been working on solutions for years with significant resources at their disposal.
Burks, who regularly communicates with U.K. government officials about NFTs, emphasized the need for regulators to take a more nuanced approach to understanding NFTs. He asserted that NFTs can be utilized in various ways beyond digital artwork and finance. For example, NFTs can be used for car records, property records, banking settlements, supply chain systems, and more. Burks compared NFTs to websites, suggesting that the regulations should be based on the specific use cases of NFTs rather than treating them as digital art pieces alone.
Related Post
The report suggested implementing the EU 17 copyright directive on NFTs, which Burks criticized as being too broad and not considering the diverse applications of NFTs. He cautioned against applying overarching regulatory frameworks to NFTs without understanding their true nature and potential.
Burks pointed to Singapore as an example for the U.K. government to follow. In Singapore, regulators assess NFTs based on their specific use cases. For instance, if an NFT represents a stock, it would fall under securities regulations. If an NFT facilitates the sale of illicit drugs, it would be regulated similarly to drugs. Burks believes that understanding the specific applications of NFTs is crucial for responsible and effective regulation.
In conclusion, Burks urges the U.K. government to consider the broader utility of NFTs and regulate them based on their specific use cases instead of treating all NFTs as digital artwork. He emphasizes the importance of protecting copyright and intellectual property rights but suggests that the current issues are not limited to NFTs alone and should be addressed at a broader internet level. By taking a more nuanced approach to regulation, the U.K. government can unlock the true potential of NFTs across various industries and ensure responsible innovation in this nascent technology.
