- About
-
The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers
to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is
provided by the
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
Search results
Showing 61 to 63 of 63 (0.016 seconds)Spelling suggestions: "subject:"blockkedja"" "subject:"blockkedjan""
| 61 |
En vetenskaplig studie om kryptovaluta i ljuset av svensk sakrätt : Bitcoin – sakrättens kryptonit? / A scientific study on cryptocurrency in the light of Swedish property law : Bitcoin - the kryptonite of property law?Champari, Amir January 2023 (has links)
Access to finance is often a vital tool for a company to make investments which in turn leads to increased generation of income. In 2022, the amount of lending to non-financial companies increased by around 13 %. Banks' traditional lending channels have recently been challenged by DeFi. Within DeFi, no central intermediary is used, the security provided is cryptocurrencies and the transaction history is public. The most common cryptocurrency used in DeFi is bitcoin. At the time of writing, bitcoin has a market capitalization of approximately $521 million. The use of DeFi has grown rapidly in 2022 as cryptocurrencies worth just under $110 billion were pledged in DeFi as collateral for credit. The EBA has previously warned about the risks of cryptocurrencies. Despite warnings, neither case law nor any clear legislation regarding cryptocurrencies and creditors protection has thus been created. Though, there is a proposal from EU that will create a uniform regulation for cryptocurrencies that are not currently covered by the EU's existing regulatory framework for financial services, the so-called MiCA regulation. In Swedish legislation, there is an ongoing investigation on how to handle cryptocurrencies. However, neither the proposals at EU-level nor national level deal with substantive legal aspects such as creditors protection. The purpose of the thesis is to present a proposal for what bitcoin as property is classified as according to Swedish law and to identify the most appropriate legal aspect when bitcoins are used within DeFi. Based on the purpose, the following questions arise (i) What type of property should the cryptocurrency bitcoin be legally classified as? (ii) How can creditor protection be achieved when a transaction with bitcoin is made? (iii) How can creditor protection be achieved when bitcoin is used as collateral? In this thesis, the legal dogmatic method and law analogies will be used to answer the questions. The conclusions are that bitcoin should first be seen as a financial instrument according to MiFID II and creditor protection in the case of acquired ownership of bitcoins can basically never be achieved. Creditor protection in case of retained ownership can be achieved with analogous application of RVL and using registration as an element of property rights. When bitcoin is used as collateral, creditor protection can be achieved through the property right element of registration or tradition. In the case of three-party escrow, notification of transfer of claim must be made to the person who holds the pledged property in accordance with the 1936 Pawn Law.
|
| 62 |
The Use of Management Control in Decentralized Autonomous Organizations : A descriptive case study on the use of management control in three Ethereum blockchain based DAOs / Användning av styrning inom DAOsÖberg, Ludvig, Almquist, Isak January 2022 (has links)
Decentralized autonomous organizations, or DAOs, are spoken highly of in cryptocurrency spaces as a new way of organizing capital and labor. The basic concept is an organization with a shared vision or goal, where the participants and/or outside stakeholders own tokens that grant governing rights over resources through smart contracts. The smart contract usage allows the organization to govern resources without relying on any trusted third parties such as governments, banks, companies or other entities, at least in theory. It also allows the governing of resources without a legal entity. As the name suggests, DAOs have a large focus on decentralization, which raises the issue of how it moves in the right direction. Management control offers suggestions for how traditional organizations move in the right, or intended, direction, and this report tries to apply theory from that field to the DAO organization type. The purpose of this report is to investigate, describe and analyze how management control systems are used within DAOs. The report is an interpretive multiple case study, which gathers data from interviews, observations and a literature study. The data is analyzed by primarily using Malmi and Brown (2008), Olve and Nilsson (2018) and Simons (1994) to filter and identify management control systems. This report investigates three DAOs, DXdao, Index Coop and ENS DAO, that attempts to answer the question of how they use management control. DXdao develops products for the blockchain ecosystem, Index Coop creates index fund-like products that bundle together blockchain based assets and ENS DAO owns and furthers a product that lets users claim names on the Ethereum blockchain to be used as URLs, usernames or for other causes. The report identifies that many management control systems, such as budget, planing and values, are used in similar ways as in traditional companies. While some other systems such as rewards and compensation, and governance structure seem to have unique aspects to them though the use of tokens for compensation, and a governance process through blockchain based voting. Furthermore, the report identifies the different definition of Decentralization between the management control field and the blockchain industry. Where the blockchain industry focus on the distribution of decision-making and control, whereas in Management Controlthe focus is on the division of responsibility to managers. The report concludes that one can view decentralization as a position on a scale, between complete individual decision making to a completely collective decision-making, where most DAOs lay in between these two extremes.
|
| 63 |
Vem äger NFT-innehavarens egendom? : – En studie av äganderätten till en non-fungible token / Who Owns the NFT Holder's Property? : – A study of the property law of a non-fungible tokenLandström, Jennifer January 2022 (has links)
Handeln av non-fungible tokens (NFT) har vuxit fram i en drastisk fart de senaste tre åren med försäljningar till miljonbelopp. Begreppet non-fungible åsyftar en icke-utbytbar egendom som karaktäriseras av sin unika kvalité och dessa tokens bygger på blockkedjeteknik med decentraliserade system. NFT:s effektiviserar överlåtelsetransaktioner av såväl materiell som immateriell egendom genom kryptering av äganderättigheter. Den här framställningen syftar till att studera ägande i förhållande till ny teknik och egendomsslaget kyprotillgångar. I uppsatsen utreds vilket äganderättsligt skydd som ges till innehavaren av en NFT och i vilka specifika delar de ur tekniken härrörande riskerna inte omfattas av förevarande lagstiftning. För att utreda rättsläget för dessa tokens görs en genomgång av äganderättsliga och immaterialrättsliga bestämmelser ämnat att bilda en förståelse för traditionella egendomsslag och hur ägandeskap har förändrats i takt med samhällsutvecklingen. Vidare görs en övergripande presentation av decentraliserade databaser, blockkedjor samt smarta kontrakt, vilka utgör teknologin bakom NFT:s. Därtill görs en längre studie av en NFT och dess risker, följt av en redogörelse för de bestämmelser som appliceras på handeln av dessa tokens idag. Avslutningsvis dras slutsatserna att ett förvärv av en NFT enbart ger äganderätt till denna token och inte per automatik ger äganderätt till ytterligare egendom. En sådan äganderätt tilllerkänner innehavaren en ensamrätt att använda, att modifiera, att sälja samt att exkludera andra från egendomen. I den mån en NFT även är tänkt att representera en underliggande tillgång krävs att parter överenskommit om det. Förutsatt att ett smart kontrakt erkänns som juridiskt bindande kan det ensamt aktualisera köplagen och andra avtalsrättsliga bestämmelser. Ett juridisk erkännande är avgörande och fram tills att så skett krävs en separat överenskommelse mellan kontraktsparter bortom blockkedjan. Kontrollen och besittningen över tillgångarna kan få praktisk betydelse. Framställningen landar i att NFT:s är unika, såväl i karaktär som i funktion, och bör betraktas som sui generis i stället för att försöka omfattas av redan befintlig lagstiftning. Förevarande lagstiftning är otillfredsställande och i praktiken är det svårt att vidga bestämmelser att även omfatta denna nya teknologi. Därför är ytterligare skyddsregler nödvändiga och teknologin fordrar skydd i en lagstiftning efter sitt eget slag, särskilt anpassad för handeln av NFT:s.
|
Page generated in 0.0203 seconds