UDC 347.4:347.122

DOI 10.37749/2308-9639-2025-12(276)-1

R. A. MAYDANYK , Doctor of Law, Professor, Professor of the Department of Civil Procedure, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

ORCID: 0000-0003-1661-0535

 SECURITY RIGHTS IN DIGITAL THINGS. IMPLEMENTATION OF BEST PRACTICES INTO UKRAINIAN LAW

 The article is devoted to the study of the implementation of best practices of security rights for digital things into Ukrainian law.

It is proven that in modern law, the global trend towards the turnover of digital things necessitates the introduction of security rights in relation to a digital thing according to the rules of a legally equated thing or property rights of the subject of security, which reflects the peculiarities of the intangible nature and information systems ensuring the civil turnover of a specific digital thing.

It is argued that it is advisable to base legislative provisions on security rights in digital things in the law of Ukraine on a general presumption of the admissibility of recognizing a digital thing, equated to a thing or property right, as the subject of security rights, taking into account the specifics of the application of certain security rights to a specific digital thing on the basis of law, contract and/or the essence of the security relationship.

It is noted that, in its essence, a security right over a digital thing is an exclusive right to dispose of it preferentially over other creditors in the event of a delay in the performance of the secured obligation .

It is advisable for the Civil Code of Ukraine to provide for provisions on the general conditions for securing digital things, based on the control of a digital thing as a functional analogue of the transfer of a material thing that is the subject of security rights.

The provisions of the Civil Code of Ukraine should provide for general conditions for securing a digital thing, according to which, in order to grant an enforceable security right : (1) the security creditor must provide the digital thing ; (2) the debtor must have rights to the subject of security or the authority to transfer the right ; and (3) the condition regarding the transfer of the digital thing under the control of the creditor must be satisfied.

The conclusion is made that security rights in digital things that have become effective against third parties as a result of control over those assets prevail. If one secured creditor has made a security right effective against third parties by registration or in another manner recognized by law but has not acquired control over the digital thing , and another secured creditor has made the security right effective as a result of control, the secured creditor who has made a security right effective in the digital thing against third parties on the basis of control shall prevail .

It was noted that the provisions on security rights in digital things should be extended to digital things that are suitable for control .

Keywords: security rights, digital thing, property, virtual assets, cryptoassets.

LIST OF REFERENCES

  1. All Cryptocurrencies, coin market cap (Dec. 21, 2018), https://coinmarketcap.com/all/views/all/; Cryptocurrency Exchanges / Markets List, cryptocoincharts (Dec. 21, 2018), https://cryptocoincharts .info/markets/info.
  2. Anna Marie Andriotis et al., Facebook Building a Cryptocurrency-Based Payments System, WALL ST. J. (May 2, 2019), https://www.wsj.com/articles/face book-building-cryptocurrency-based-payments-system-11556837547.
  3. David Chaum, Blind signatures for untraceable payments (1998), http://sceweb.sce.uhcl.edu/yang/teaching/csci5234WebSecurityFall 2011/Chaum-blind-signatures.pdf
  4. Stefan Brands, Untraceable off-line cash in wallet with observers (1993), https://link.springer.com/content/ pdf/10.1007%2F3-540-48329-2_26.pdf
  5. Tatsuaki Okamoto & Kazuo Ohta, Universal Electronic Cash (1992), https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/ 10.1007%2F3-540-46766-1_27.pdf
  6. David Chaum, et al., Untraceable electronic cash (1990), https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2F0 387-34799-2_25.pdf.
  7. Kristin Johnson et al., (Im)Perfect Regulation: Virtual Currency and Other Digital Assets as Collateral, 21 Smu Sci. & Tech. L. rev. 115 (2018). 115:158. P. 115. URL: https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech/vol21/iss2/2
  8. Milne A., Mainelli M. The Impact and Potential of Blockchain on the Securities Transaction Lifecycle. SWIFT Institute Working Paper. 2016. Issue 2015-007. 81 p. P. 1–2.
  9. Gomber P., Kauffman RJ, Parker C., Weber BW On the Fintech Revolution: Interpreting the Forces of Innovation, Disruption, and Transformation in Financial Services. Journal of Management Information Systems. 2018. Issue 35. No. 1. pp. 220–265. P. 242 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2018.1440766.
  10. 10. Carla L. Reyes, Conceptualizing Cryptolaw, 96 NEB. L. REV. 384 (2017).
  11. 11. Kevin Werback & Nicolas Corness, Contracts Ex Machnia, 67 DUKE LJ 313 (2017).
  12. 12. Robinson Randolph, The New Digital Wild West: Regulating the Explosion of Initial Coin Offerings 85 Tenn. L. rev. 897 (2018), https://tennesseelawreviewdotcom .files.wordpress.com/2019/03/5-robinson-macros-working-copy-v.3.pdf
  13. 13. Jona than Rohr & Aaron Wright, Blockchain-Based Token Sales, Initial Coin Offerings, and the Democratization of Public Capital Markets (Oct. 4, 2017), https:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3048104.
  14. 14. Civil Code of Ukraine: Law of Ukraine dated 16.01.2003 No. 435-IV. URL: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-15#Text
  15. 15. Donge He, ‘Monetary Policy in the Digital Age’ IMF Finance & Development, June 2018, Vol 55, No 2. The rationale of this definition is similar to that of the definitions of ‘distributed ledger technology’ and ‘crypto-assets’ for the purposes of Article 3 (1)(1) and (2) of the Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council on Markets in Crypto-assets, and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937, COM (2020) 593 final (MiCA).
  16. Mulyani S., Mariyam S., Hong Trung Le H., Legal Construction of Crypto Assets as Objects of Fiduciary Collateral Law Reform, 19(1), 2022, 25—39.
  17. 17. Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I). Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I).
  18. 18. Digital Assets and Private Law. Study LXXXII – Digital Assets and Private Law Project. Access: https://www.unidroit.org/work-in-progress/digital-assets-and-private-law/ https://www.unidroit.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/CD-102-6-Principles-on-Digital-Assets-and-Private-Law.pdf.
  19. 19. ELI Principles on the Use of Digital Assets as Security Report of the European Law Institute.
  20. 20. Digital Assets and Private Law Public Consultation UNIDROIT 2023 Study LXXXII – PC English only January 2023 Draft UNIDROIT Principles on Digital assets and private law.
  21. Asmara, TPA, Abubakar. L., and Handayani, T. (2019). Digital Assets: The Idea of ​​Indonesian Property Law Reform and Its Potential as a Collateral Object, Hasanuddin Law Review, 5 (3): 278—288.
  22. 22. Bob Lawless, Is UCC Article 9 the Achilles Heel of Bitcoin?, Credit Slips blog (Mar. 10, 2014, 8:17 PM), http://www.creditslips.org/creditslips/2014/ 03/is-ucc-article-9-the-achilles-heel-of-bitcoin.html).
  23. Report of Investigation Pursuant to Section 21(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: The DAO, Securities Exchange Act Release No. 81207, 2017 WL 7184670, at *1 (July 25, 2017).
  24. 24. Jeanne L. Schroeder, Bitcoin and the Uniform Commercial Code, 24 U. MIAMI BUS. L. REV. 1 (2016).
  25. 25. Xuan-Thao Nguyen, Lessons from a Case Study of Secured Transactions with Bitcoin, 21 SMU SCI. & TECH. L. REV. (forthcoming 2019).
  26. 26. Kevin V. Tu, Perfecting Bitcoin, 52 GA. L. REV. 505, 547–50 (2018).
  27. 27. Daniel Krawisz, Bitcoin as a Store of Value, Unit of Account, and Medium of Exchange, Satoshi Nakamoto inst. (Jan. 12, 2015), https://nakamotoinsti tute.org/mempool/bitcoin-as-a-store-of-value-unit-of-account-and-medium-of exchange/.
  28. 28. Ian A. Holcomb, Bitcoin’s Standing Within the Global Regulatory and Economic Marketplace, 23 Currents: J. Int’l econ. L. 56, 61 (2016).
  29. 29. Jeanne L. Schroeder, Bitcoin and the Uniform Commercial Code, 24 U. Miami bus. L. rev. 1 (2016), supra note 48, at
  30. 30. Kevin V. Tu & Michael W. Meredith, Rethinking Virtual Currency Regulation in the Bitcoin Age, 90 Wash. L.Rev. 271 (2015). URL: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol90/iss1/6.
  31. 31. Ronald J. Mann, Reliable Perfection of Security Interests in Crypto-Currency SMU Science and Technology Law Review II. Conventional perfection [Vol. XXI]. 159:180. URL: https://www.columbia.edu/~mr2651/Reliable_21_SMU_SciTech_LRev_159.pdf.
  32. Maidanyk R. A. Security rights in relation to virtual assets. Introduction of best practices into the law of Ukraine. Current problems of intellectual, information, IT and Internet law: materials of the Eighth All-Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference (Lviv, May 15, 2024). Lviv: Law Faculty of Lviv. National University named after I. Franko, 2024. 235 p. pp. 109–116.