區塊鏈技術目前在版權領域是非常火的一個概念，尤其是6月28日，杭州互聯網法院對一起侵害作品信息網絡傳播權糾紛案進行公開宣判，首次對採用區塊鏈技術存証的電子數據法律效力予以確認，並明確了區塊鏈電子存証的審查判斷方法。由於宣判后雙方均未提出上訴，目前該判決已經生效。
In particular, on June 28, the Hangzhou Internet Court of Justice issued an open judgement in a case of violation of copyright for online distribution of works, establishing for the first time the legal validity of the electronic data stored in the use of the chain of works, and clearly establishing the method of adjudication of the serial chain of electronic evidence. Since neither party has filed a complaint, the decision is now in force.
該案也因此成為全國首例區塊鏈存証案，並引發社會的廣泛關注，畢竟區塊鏈技術被稱之為下一代互聯網，而存証又是業內公認的區塊鏈最容易落地的應用場景，法院可以說在最合適的時候給出了最有力的效力背書，對於區塊鏈應用的落地有著裡程碑式的意義。
As a result, the case became the country’s first-ever chain of evidence and generated widespread social attention, after all, the chain technology was called the next-generation network, and the evidence was the most readily accessible feature of the industry’s chain, and the court could say that it gave the most effective endorsement at the right time, and that there was an introverted meaning to the site where the chain was to be used.
了解判決書裡的區塊鏈存証
其實很多人看了這個判決后都覺得雲裡霧裡，尤其是對裡面眼花繚亂的技術名詞和存証步驟感到困惑。有些看懂了原理的朋友還提出質疑，說這個叫什麼區塊鏈存証，不過是第三方存証公司把數據摘要放到了區塊鏈上而已。
In fact, many people look at the verdict and find it confusing, especially with the technical nouns and depositions in it. Some friends who understand the principles question what kind of chain this is, but it's a third-party record company that put the extracts on the chain.
這個質疑好像很有道理，筆者最初看完判決書也有同樣的疑問，於是順著這個線索對區塊鏈存証做了更深入地研究，包括讀了判決書中提到的公証通（FACTOM）所發布的白皮書、國內幾家存証機構創始人對區塊鏈存証原理的分析文章，終於一個重要的結論開始浮出水面，那就是：區塊鏈存証第一案中保全網所採用的是借助“錨定”技術實現的區塊鏈存証，而這種方式恐怕將成為日后區塊鏈存証的主流。
This question seems to be valid, and the same question arose from my initial reading of the judgment, which led me to a more in-depth study of the chain evidence, including reading the white paper published by FACTOM, the analysis of the principle of chain evidence by the founders of several national record-keeping institutions, and finally to an important conclusion, namely, that the preservation network in the first case of the chain evidence was using the chain memory of the sector through the “settling” technique, which is likely to become the mainstream of the chain of evidence in the future.
那麼我們就抽絲剝繭地來展示一下這個結論是怎麼得到的。
So let's do a little bit of scribbling to show how we get this conclusion.
了解當前電子存証的朋友都知道，通常情況下，電子存証走到第三步，就要把數據交給公証處或者鑒定中心了，以便尋求權威機構的背書從而增強效力。但保全網另辟一條蹊徑在這個環節中把數據交給了FACTOM區塊鏈和比特幣區塊鏈，為什麼這麼做，難道是把FACTOM區塊鏈和比特幣區塊鏈當成了公証處在用嗎？
A friend who knows about the current electronic recorder knows that normally, when it comes to the third step, the electronic record is handed over to the public record office or to the centre of identification, in order to seek the endorsement of the authority. But a separate thread in the security network gives the data to the FACTOM sector chain and to the Bitcoin sector chain in this section. Why does it use the FACTOM sector chain and the Bitcoin sector as a public link?
其實，FACTOM是美國一家知名的使用區塊鏈技術來保護和驗証數據的公司，其產品核心原理就是將數據錨定到比特幣區塊鏈上。因此，大家會發現，保全網的存証流程到了第四步，就是通過FACTOM將數據錨定到了比特幣區塊鏈上。
In fact, FACTOM is a well-known American company that uses chain technology to protect and test the data, and its core principle is to anchor the data onto the bitcoin chain. So, you will find that the secure network has reached the fourth stage of the process, which is to lock the data onto the bitcoin chain through FACTOM.
弄清“錨定”到底是個啥
finds out what the anchor is. >/strong >
眾所周知，比特幣的底層架構技術就是區塊鏈技術，因此比特幣剝離“貨幣”的屬性剩下的是一個底層區塊鏈架構——也就是一條“鏈”。
It is well known that the bottom-structured technology of the Bitcoin is a chain technology, so that what remains of the bitcoin's property is a bottom-level chain — that is, a chain.
而這條鏈非同尋常的地方在於，就目前而言它是存在時間最久、運營時間最長、經過多次攻擊檢驗最可靠的區塊鏈條，這一特性使得比特幣區塊鏈成為存放數據、防止數據篡改的首選，大家可以把數據理解為基於比特幣的一項交易，一旦交易被比特幣所“記賬”，則這筆交易將永久地存在於比特幣區塊鏈上，無法被刪除和修改了。
And what is unusual about this chain is that it is currently the longest in existence, the longest in operation, and the most reliable chain after multiple attacks, a feature that makes the Bitcoin chain the first choice for storing data and preventing data manipulation, and that can be understood as a bitcoin-based transaction that, once the transaction is “recorded” by the Bitcoin, will remain permanently on the Bitcoin chain and cannot be deleted or modified.
舉個例子，一艘船待在水上會隨波逐流，那麼要想讓船穩定的最好辦法莫過於在岸上找到一個穩固的錨點，把船拴在上面。比特幣區塊鏈就是那個最穩固的“錨點”，而把數據“拴”在錨點上的過程就叫做錨定。
By way of example, if a ship stays in the water and flows, then the best way to stabilize it is to find a steady anchor on shore and to tie it to it. The bitcoin chain is the surest anchor, and the way to tie the data to the anchor point is called anchoring.
而FACTOM正是開發了一個妥善可用的錨定程序，並且在數據錨定到比特幣區塊鏈之后，還可以實現數據的快速檢索、驗証等。因此，筆者推測保全網的最終目的是將數據放到比特幣區塊鏈上，隻不過這個上鏈和錨定的過程是借助FACTOM來實現的，因為FACTOM存儲的數據摘要本來也是錨定在比特幣區塊鏈上的。
FACTOM, for its part, has developed a well-functioning locking program and has been able to obtain data fast-tracking, proofing, etc. after the data have been anchored to the bitcoin chain. So, I assumed that the ultimate purpose of the net was to place data on the bitcoin chain, but only that the upper chain and locking process had been done with FACTOM, because the summary of data stored by FACTOM was also fixed on the bitcoin chain.
“錨定”是怎樣實現的
How does "strange" work?
要知道，在比特幣區塊鏈上放數據是有成本的，而且比特幣區塊鏈的技術特性決定了在上面錨定數據體量不可能太大。因此，存証機構當然不會把全部的存証數據都放上去，而是將存証數據進行摘要計算得到數字指紋，必要時還會通過默克爾樹（Merkle Tree）算法來計算獲得這個Hash值，也被稱之為Merkle根。從而進一步降低數據體量，然后將根值放到比特幣區塊鏈上去。
You know, putting data on the bitcoin chain is a cost, and the technical characteristics of the bitcoin chain determine that it is unlikely to be too large to anchor the data on it. Therefore, the depository will certainly not put all the stored data on it, but will do a summary of the data to get digital fingerprints and, if necessary, use Merkel Tree to calculate the Hash value, which is also called Merkele root.
一般挂載數據到比特幣區塊鏈上的通常做法是，將默克爾根值以交易的形式寫入比特幣一個可以提供80字節空間的OP_Return區域，一旦這筆交易被比特幣區塊鏈確認收錄（記賬），則錨定宣告完成。
The usual way to load the data onto the bitcoin chain is to write the Merkelgan value in the form of a transaction into an OP_Return area that provides 80-bit space, which is set to be completed once the transaction is confirmed by the bitcoin chain (account).
區塊鏈扮演去中心化的公証處角色
至此，我們可以明確，比特幣區塊鏈在整個電子存証過程中被當作了一個去中心化的公証處。電子存証機構由於對自身存儲數據的客觀公立性以及防篡改等要求不夠自信，引入了比特幣這條最強有力的公鏈來做背書，而第三方存証機構所做的是在用戶和比特幣公鏈之間搭建了一個“數據通道”，讓數據可以錨定上去的同時便於檢索和驗証。
So we can make it clear that the bitcoin chain is treated as a decentralised public document throughout the electronic record-keeping process. Because of the lack of confidence in the objectivity of the data stored by the electronic record-keeping system and its anti-polysis requirements, the most powerful public chain of the bitcoin has been introduced to back the book, while the third-party record-keeping facility has built a “digital channel” between the user and the Bitcoin public chain, so that the data can be checked and tested at the same time as the data can be locked up.
與傳統引入公証處背書相比，區塊鏈是去中心化的一個技術方案，而且理論上任何電子存証機構都可以接入，一旦效力獲得認可（事實上互聯網法院已經通過判例認可），其可靠性、便利性、開放性以及降低成本等多個方面都更有優勢，在此，筆者給這種存証形態命名為“錨定式區塊鏈存証”。
The chain is a technologically decentralised programme, compared to the traditional introduction of public evidence, and the theoretical access of any electronic record-keeping institution is more favourable in terms of reliability, convenience, openness and cost reduction once it has been recognized (in fact, the Internet court has passed a case law).
為何錨定式區塊鏈存証具有可靠性
why the locking blocks chain is reliable
事實上，區塊鏈存証也有很多形態，包括自建區塊鏈（私鏈）存放數據、搭建聯盟鏈存放數據以及本文所說的錨定式區塊鏈存証（不一定是錨定到比特幣，也可以是以太坊或其他公鏈）。
In fact, there are also many forms of chain memory, including self-built chain (private chain) data storage, federal chain-building data storage and what this refers to as locking (not necessarily to bitcoin, but also to tama or other public chains).
其中，筆者更加看好的還是錨定式區塊鏈存証這一種，其實原因很簡單，就是錨定到公鏈尤其是比特幣或以太坊等經過實踐檢驗可靠的公鏈更能保障數據的完整性，而數據完整、未經篡改恰恰是電子存証所追求的最終目標。私鏈和聯盟鏈在這方面由於“鏈”本身的技術特性導致“強度”遜於公鏈，可靠性始終是個問題。
The reason why I look much better at the lock-in chain is that locking into a public chain, especially a reliable one such as Bitcoins or Etheria, is more likely to guarantee the integrity of the data, which is the ultimate goal pursued by the electronic memory. In this respect, the “strength” of the private chain and the union chain, which is driven by the technical characteristics of the chain itself, is a problem, and reliability is always a problem.
當然，必須說明的是，基於私鏈和聯盟鏈的電子存証仍有很大的發展空間和特殊的優勢，例如在較為封閉的生態系統中，居於中心地位的平台所運營或維護的區塊鏈（私鏈、聯盟鏈）在生態系統內部還是具有較高的可靠性，尤其是針對一些無需通過法院而是在生態系統內部就可以消化的存証問題，包括供應鏈交易確認、產品質量溯源等。這些場景下，私鏈和聯盟鏈存証效力足夠解決問題，同時還更靈活多變，能定制開發出更多可用的存証產品。
Of course, it must be pointed out that there are still a lot of developmental and special advantages to electronic evidence based on private chains and chains, such as the fact that, within a closed system, the chains (private chains, chains) that are operated or maintained by a central platform are still more reliable within the system, especially with regard to the evidentiary problems that can be absorbed without having to go through the courts but within the system, including chain transaction identification, product retrace, etc. In these settings, the chain and union links have proven to be effective enough to solve the problem, and are more dynamic at the same time, customizing more available evidence products.
錨定式區塊鏈存証成司法認定的關鍵點
anchored section links proved to be the key to judicial recognition
錨定式區塊鏈存証絕非百分之百可靠，在司法實踐中，即便使用了這種存証方式，仍然需要在個案中對存証獲得的數據証明力進行認定，尤其是在數據挂載到區塊鏈之前，這個時間段內數據的真實性和完整性是區塊鏈本身無法証明的，就好像公証處隻能証明看到了什麼數據，但証明不了之前沒看到的數據。
The chain of anchors is by no means 100 per cent reliable and, even if it is used in judicial practice, there is still a need to recognize the evidentiary strength of the evidence in a case, especially since the authenticity and integrity of the data during this time period cannot be demonstrated by the chain itself, as if the Public Prosecutor's Office could only prove what data it saw, but not previously.
因此，筆者認為在數據上鏈之前，法院仍有必要在兩個環節進行審查：
, therefore, I believe that it is still necessary for the court to conduct an examination in two circles before the data is chained: .
首先，應審查當事人使用錨定式區塊鏈存証工具的具體流程以及現場還原程度。因為，在當事人將目標數據提取之前，數據的形態以及是否經過了人為的修改是不得而知的。所以此時需要當事人向法院証明其取証的操作流程，以及使用具體工具時所處的終端、網絡環境是否可靠。
First, it should examine the process and the extent to which the person in question is using the locking-up chain memory tool. Because, before the person in question extracts the target data, the form of the data and whether it has been modified by the person in question are unknown. This requires the person in question to prove to the court the course of his or her operations and the reliability of the end-of-the-line and network environment in which the tool is used.
其次，存証工具本身的原理和可靠性也很重要。包括存証工具是否對當事人的操作留存了足夠的日志、存証工具所使用的錨定算法能否確保數據不經篡改地放到了區塊鏈上去、存証工具能否提供可靠的數據校驗方法。我們注意到在區塊鏈存証第一案中，杭州互聯網法院就審查了保全網所使用的谷歌抓取程序以及其他的存証流程。
Second, the rationale and reliability of the tool itself is also important. This includes whether the tool has sufficient logs for the user’s operation, whether the anchoring algorithm used by the tool ensures that the data is placed on the chain without tampering, and whether the tool provides reliable data proofing methods. We note that in the first case of the chain of evidence, the Hangzhou Internet Court examined Google capture procedures used by the preservation network, as well as other record-keeping processes.
全國首例區塊鏈存証案
the country's first chain of evidence
6月28日，杭州互聯網法院對一起侵害作品信息網絡傳播權糾紛案進行公開宣判，首次對採用區塊鏈技術存証的電子數據的法律效力予以確認，並明確了區塊鏈電子存証的審查判斷方法。
On June 28, the Hangzhou Internet Court of Justice issued a public ruling in a case of violation of the copyright of the Internet transmission of works, confirming for the first time the legal validity of the electron data from the use of the serial chain technology and establishing a clear method of judging the serial chain of electron records.
該案中，原告杭州某公司為証明被告深圳某公司在其運營的網站中發表了原告享有著作權的相關作品，原告通過第三方存証平台，進行了侵權網頁的自動抓取及侵權頁面的源碼識別，並將該兩項內容和調用日志等的壓縮包計算成哈希值上傳至FACTOM區塊鏈和比特幣區塊鏈中。該種以區塊鏈技術作為電子數據存儲、確保數據完整性的方式，是互聯網技術與電子數據存証的新融合，給機構創新、維權模式創新提供了更多的可能性，體現電子証據發展新趨勢。
In this case, the plaintiff, a company in Hangzhou, proved that the defendant, a company in Shenzhen, had published works related to the plaintiff’s copyright on its operating website. The plaintiff, via the third-party record-keeping platform, carried out an automatic source recognition of the intrusion web page, and calculated the compressed packages of the two content and transfer logs as hadh values to be uploaded into the FACTOM and Bitcoin chains. The use of the sector chain technology as an electronic data repository and as a means of ensuring the integrity of the data was a new integration between the Internet technology and the electronic data repository, which provided more possibilities for new models of computer creation and rights, and the development of digital evidence.
杭州互聯網法院認為，對於採用區塊鏈等技術手段進行存証固定的電子數據，應秉承開放、中立的態度進行個案分析認定。既不能因為區塊鏈等技術本身屬於當前新型復雜技術手段而排斥或者提高其認定標准，也不能因該技術具有難以篡改、刪除的特點而降低認定標准，應根據電子數據的相關法律規定綜合判斷其証據效力。
According to the Hangzhou Internet court, an open-minded and neutral approach should be used to identify electronic data that are valid for the use of technical means such as sector chains. Neither can technologies such as sector chains be excluded from, or subject to higher standards because they are inherently part of, the new and modern techniques, nor can they lower the standard of recognition because of their difficult to alter and delete features, and the validity of their evidence should be determined in accordance with the relevant legal rules of electronic data.
杭州互聯網法院承辦法官表示，區塊鏈作為一種去中心化的數據庫，具有開放性、分布式、不可逆性等特點，其作為一種電子數據存儲平台具有低成本、高效率、穩固性的優勢，在實踐審判中應以技術中立、技術說明、個案審查為原則，對該種電子証據存儲方式的法律效力予以綜合認定。
According to the judge in charge of the Hangzhou Internet Court, the sector chain is a decentralised database with special features such as openness, distribution, irreversibility, etc., and as a low-cost, efficient and stable electronic data storage platform, with technical neutrality, technical instructions, and a case-by-case review as the basis for the determination of the legal force of the electronic evidence storage system in the trial.
法院對電子証據審查方式：
杭州互聯網法院結合區塊鏈技術用於數據存儲的技術原理，以電子証據審查的法律標准為基礎，對區塊鏈電子存証的效力認定確立了如下審查方式：
The Hangzhou Internet Court of Justice, using the technical principles of chaining techniques for data storage, based on the legal standard of electronic evidence review, has established the following method of checking the validity of the chain of electronic evidence:
1.審查電子數據來源的真實性。包括第三方存証平台資質合規、產生電子數據的技術可靠、傳遞電子數據的路徑可查﹔
1. To examine the trueness of the source of the electronic data, including the integrity of the third-party record-keeping platform, the technical reliability of generating the electronic data, and the path of transmission of the electronic data;
2.審查電子數據存儲的可靠性。包括電子數據上傳至公共區塊鏈、各區塊鏈存放內容相互印証、區塊節點生成時間符合邏輯﹔
2. To examine the reliability of electronic data storage, including the uploading of electronic data to public sector chains, cross-printing of the contents of the chain, and logical timing of block node generation;
3.審查電子數據內容的完整性。即電子數據Hash值能驗算一致未被修改﹔
3. To examine the integrity of the contents of the electronic data.
4.審查電子証據與其他証據相互印証的關聯度，從而對該種証據的法律效力及証明力予以確認。具體到本案，該院認為通過可信度較高的自動抓取程序進行網頁截圖、源碼識別，能夠保証電子數據來源真實﹔採用符合相關標准的區塊鏈技術對上述電子數據進行存証固定，確保了電子數據的可靠性﹔在確認Hash值驗算一致且與其他証據能夠相互印証的前提下，作出了該種電子數據可以作為本案侵權認定的依據。
4. Examination of the link between the electronic evidence and the other evidence, from the point of view of its legal validity and evidentiary strength. Specifically, in this case, the Court found that a web screening and source identification by means of a more credible automatic grab procedure would guarantee the authenticity of the electronic data; that the use of a relevant chain technology to keep the digital data in check ensured the reliability of the electronic data; and that the electronic data had been used to confirm that the Hash test was consistent with the evidence and that other evidence could be cross-printed, and that the electronic data could be used as a basis for recognition of the infraction rights in the case.
分享讓更多人看到 
注册有任何问题请添加 微信：MVIP619 拉你进入群
打开微信扫一扫
添加客服
进入交流群
发表评论