Written by: Christiana Flores
Edited by: Emily Pedro
Blockchain technology offers new advantages for the art industry, particularly in addressing longstanding legal and structural problems in the traditional art market. Features of the technology can improve the ways ownership is recorded, authenticity is verified, and contractual terms are enforced, all of which are foundational to the art market and for safeguarding intellectual property. These developments not only help resolve issues that existing legal frameworks have struggled to manage but also generate new opportunities for artists and institutions to engage in the art market with greater transparency and control.
Effect on Provenance and Authenticity
Provenance and authenticity are likely the aspects of the traditional art market most significantly affected by blockchain technology. Historically, the art world has struggled to maintain reliable ownership records, creating space for forgery, fraud, and uncertainty.[1] Experts estimate that up to fifty percent of artworks circulating in the market may be misattributed or forged, a figure that undermines trust among collectors, institutions, and insurers.[2] The immutability and transparency of blockchains provide a credible way to address these problems by creating verifiable digital records of ownership and transfer.
Platforms like Verisart and Artory have implemented blockchain-based certification systems that create tamper-proof digital records of an artwork’s provenance.[3] When information such as authorship, ownership history, and custody chain is permanently stored on a distributed ledger, it becomes significantly harder to manipulate or falsify.[4] This transparency gives “greater assurance to collectors, museums, and other stakeholders about the authenticity of their acquisitions,” while also helping to reduce the number of disputes that arise over attribution and title.[5] In this way, blockchain begins to fill a long-standing gap in how the art market documents and verifies ownership.
Implications for Copyright Law
Blockchain’s impact on provenance and authentication also directly connects to copyright law. Under 17 U.S.C. §§ 101–106, copyright protection attaches automatically to an original work fixed in a tangible medium.[6] However, enforcing those rights requires identifiable authorship and ownership.[7] Blockchain’s timestamped and verifiable records can provide strong evidentiary support for authorship and originality, reinforcing the factual foundation of copyright claims. Recording immutable proof of creation and transfers on a distributed ledger helps ensure that the person asserting copyright ownership can trace a clear and verifiable chain of title.[8]
Beyond establishing authorship, courts and regulators outside the U.S. are beginning to treat blockchain data as legally reliable. In 2018, a Chinese Internet Court in Hangzhou was the first to recognize that “electronic data stored on a blockchain could be treated as electronic evidence.”[9] Subsequently, that same court “recognised the authenticity and integrity of electronic evidence not only stored, but generated by blockchain.”[10] Similarly, the United Kingdom Ministry of Justice has been exploring blockchain as a tool for securing and streamlining the handling of digital evidence.[11]
Federal courts in the United States have not yet formally recognized blockchain records as admissible evidence.[12] However, several states have enacted legislation addressing the use of blockchain within their judicial and commercial systems, ranging from the treatment of blockchain-based records to the recognition of blockchain-secured signatures.[13] For example, under Del. Gen. Corp. Law § 224 (amended 2017), corporations may maintain records using distributed electronic networks or databases, including blockchain, so long as “the records so kept can be converted into clearly legible paper form within a reasonable time.”[14] Similarly, Vermont’s 12 V.S.A. § 1913 provides that a “digital record electronically registered in a blockchain” is self-authenticating if accompanied by a written declaration verifying the transaction’s details.[15] In Arizona, A.Z. Rev. Stat. § 44-7061 and related statutes recognize that a signature, record, or contract secured through blockchain technology qualifies as a valid electronic signature or record under state law.[16]
Conclusion
Blockchain technology addresses and combats provenance and authenticity issues that have long plagued the art industry. In turn, this strengthens copyright claims through improved evidence of ownership. Judicial systems and legislatures are beginning to recognize and legitimize distributed ledger-based recordkeeping in the United States and abroad. Although federal adoption remains limited, state legislation signals an emerging consensus that blockchain.
[1] Jason Bailey, Why Use Blockchain Provenance for Art?, Artnome (Jan. 29, 2018), https://www.artnome.com/news/2018/1/26/why-use-blockchain-provenance-for-art [https://perma.cc/24MV-9AYU].
[2] Jordan Cole, The Impact of Blockchain on Provenance and Authenticity, Blockapps (April 12, 2024), https://blockapps.net/blog/the-impact-of-blockchain-on-provenance-and-authenticity/ [https://perma.cc/9UGJ-23MD].
[3] Id.
[4] Id.
[5] Id.
[6] 17 U.S.C. §§ 101–106.
[7] Id.
[8] The Ultimate Guide to Blockchain in Intellectual Property, Abounaja, https://abounaja.com/blog/blockchain-
technology-and-intellectual-property [https://perma.cc/Q3AU-YR3Z] (last visited Dec. 1, 2025).
[9] Hong Wu & Guan Zheng, Electronic Evidence in the Blockchain Era: New Rules on Authenticity and Integrity, 36 42 Comput. L. & Sec. Rev., (2020), at 2, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0267364920300066 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2020.105401].
[10] Id.
[11] Muyao Shen, UK Government Pilots Blockchain in Bid to Secure Digital Evidence, CoinDesk (Sep. 13, 2021), https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/08/23/uk-government-pilots-blockchain-in-bid-to-secure-digital-evidence [https://perma.cc/58PL-TRHP].
[12] Alex Ashrafi, Comment, Blockchain as Evidence: How Will It Get into Court?, William & Mary Ctr. for Legal & Ct. Tech., (2019), at 6.
[13] Alexandra Sahara, Blockchain Evidence: How Smart Litigators Can Keep It Out at Trial, 92 Fordham L. Rev. 42, 43 (2024).
[14] Del. Code Ann. tit. 8, § 224 (2017).
[15] Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 12, § 1913.
[16] Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 44-7061.
