Web3 Programmers Urgent Self-Check: Technical Circumvention Infringement of Copyright Now Criminalized

Written by: Li Xinyi

A ruling by the Hangzhou Internet Court in the "Fat Tiger Gets Vaccinated" NFT infringement case clearly tells us: decentralization does not mean absence of responsibility; behind the technology, there are still clear legal boundaries.

Many people believe that as long as they are only developing technology, building platforms, or providing tools, and are not directly involved in infringement, they should be fine. But this ruling clearly points out: technology itself cannot serve as a "shield" for infringement; if used improperly, it can still be illegal.

In this article, we will discuss a crucial yet often overlooked concept: "Technology-Circumvention Copyright Infringement."

• What is it?
• How can ordinary people avoid it?
• How can we find a balance between innovation and compliance?

Technology-Circumvention Infringement: The Fatal Shortcut Around "Digital Locks"

In the fields of Web3 and digital creation, there is a type of infringement that is often underestimated: it does not directly steal content but rather circumvents the "digital locks" protecting content, such as cracking encryption, tampering with licensing agreements, or providing cracking tools. Although such behavior may seem indirect, its harm is actually greater—like creating a master key that opens the door to large-scale infringement.

These "locks" mainly include two types:

• Access control measures: such as paywalls, membership verification, which determine "whether you can enter";
• Copyright protection measures: such as anti-copying watermarks, DRM systems, which restrict "what you can do after entering."

Circumvention behavior is also divided into two categories:

• Direct circumvention: personally cracking the lock, equivalent to "making your own key";
• Indirect circumvention: creating or providing cracking tools, equivalent to "opening a master key factory."

The reason laws severely crack down on such behavior is that it enables infringement to become "batch-processed": a single cracking tool may be used by thousands of people, severely disrupting copyright order and the creative ecosystem.

Web3's "Circumvention Minefield": When Technology Bypass Meets the Immutable Chain

After understanding the basic concepts, let's examine its evolution in the context of Web3.

• Broader circumvention targets: Previously, it involved cracking specific software. Now, it might involve attacking a blockchain protocol that verifies the copyright of AI training data or tampering with the smart contract logic that determines NFT access permissions. The lock has become a virtual consensus.
• More complex actors: For example, a developer open-sources a script on GitHub that bypasses a platform's technical protection measures, receives funding through a DAO, and is automatically executed by global anonymous nodes. The involved actors now transcend geographical limitations—developers, the DAO that approved the vote, all executing nodes...
• Infringement consequences are recorded: On traditional networks, infringing content can be deleted. But in Web3, common legal orders like "cease infringement" or "eliminate the impact" become technically difficult to enforce. The state of infringement may be permanently locked, and the rights holder's damages continue to occur, irreversible.
• Clear legal red lines already exist: According to the "Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Infringement of Intellectual Property Rights" by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, providing tools or services specifically designed to circumvent copyright protection measures, if serious, can constitute a criminal offense. If project parties cross this line, they will directly face legal sanctions; platform parties cannot claim "technological neutrality" to avoid liability and must undertake preliminary review obligations, otherwise they may bear joint liability.

Establishing Compliance Guidelines: How to Navigate Safely in the Web3 Era

Faced with the legal risks brought by technological circumvention, compliance is no longer an "option" but a "lifeline" for the survival and development of Web3 projects. True compliance should be a collaborative effort involving law, technology, and community governance:

• From "passive exemption" to "active governance": For platforms with substantial control, the role of lawyers has shifted from seeking "safe harbor" protection to assisting in establishing a copyright governance system commensurate with their capabilities, transforming legal obligations into actionable monitoring checklists, such as smart contract audit mechanisms and high-risk content monitoring.
• Compliance must "intervene early": Professional legal advice should be introduced at early stages like token model design and technical solution selection to fundamentally prevent circumvention-type infringement risks. If problems already exist, professional defense is needed to clarify the boundary between "technological exploration" and "malicious illegality."
• Professional support is long-term assurance: In the Web3 field where rules are still evolving, compliance construction requires teams that understand both technology and the law. If you or your project faces related risks or needs to build a compliance framework, it is advisable to contact professional teams like Mankun Lawyers for full-cycle guidance from model design to risk response.

Only by embedding a compliance mindset into the project's DNA and addressing potential risks with forward-looking architecture can we go further in balancing innovation and safety.