SEC专员Hester Peirce表示，大多数具有创建特许权使用费机制的NFT可能属于联邦证券法的权限。

美国证券交易委员会（SEC）专员赫斯特·皮尔斯（Hester Peirce）表示，许多没有可杀死的代币（NFT），包括那些具有支付创作者特许权使用费的机制的代币（NFTS），可能不在联邦证券法律的范围之内。

United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Hester Peirce has said many non-fungible tokens (NFTs), including those with mechanisms to pay creator royalties, likely fall outside the purview of federal securities laws.

美国证券交易委员会（SEC）专员赫斯特·皮尔斯（Hester Peirce）表示，许多不可杀死的代币（NFT），包括那些具有支付创作者特许权使用费的机制的代币（NFTS），可能不在联邦证券法律的范围内。

In a recent speech, Peirce said NFTs that allow artists to earn resale revenue do not automatically qualify as stocks. Unlike stocks, NFTs are programmable assets that distribute proceeds to developers or artists. The SEC official said that mirrors how streaming platforms compensate musicians and filmmakers.

皮尔斯（Peirce）在最近的演讲中说，允许艺术家获得转售收入的NFTS没有自动作为股票资格。与股票不同，NFT是将收益分配给开发商或艺术家的可编程资产。 SEC官员说，反映了流媒体平台如何补偿音乐家和电影制片人。

“Just as streaming platforms pay royalties to the creator of a song or video each time a user plays it, an NFT can enable artists to benefit from the appreciation in the value of their work after its initial sale,” Peirce said.

Peirce说：“正如流媒体平台每次用户播放时向歌曲或视频的创建者支付特许权使用费一样，NFT也可以使艺术家能够从最初销售后的工作价值中受益。”

Peirce added that the feature does not provide NFT owners any rights or interest in any business enterprise or profits “traditionally associated with securities.”

Peirce补充说，该功能并未为任何业务企业或“传统上与证券相关的利润”提供NFT所有者的任何权利或权益。

SEC never prohibited NFT royalties

SEC从不禁止NFT特许权使用费

Oscar Franklin Tan, chief legal officer of Enjin core contributor Atlas Development Services, told Cointelegraph that recent remarks by Peirce on NFTs and creator royalties have been widely misunderstood.

Enjin核心贡献者Atlas Development Services首席法律官Oscar Franklin Tan告诉Cointelegraph，Peirce最近对NFTS和创作者的特许权使用费的评论已被广泛误解。

Peirce had clarified that NFTs which send resale royalties to artists are not necessarily securities, a view Tan says is legally sound but mischaracterized in some media reports.

皮尔斯（Peirce）澄清说，向艺术家发送转售特许权使用费的NFT不一定是证券。

“So Hester Peirce said that an NFT which sends royalties back to the creator after a sale is not a security. This is correct, but the way some media reported this is completely out of context,” Tan told Cointelegraph. “The actual context is that this is not controversial, and it was never considered a security.”

“因此，海斯特·皮尔斯（Hester Peirce）说，在销售后将特许权使用费还给创作者的NFT不是安全性。这是正确的，但是某些媒体报告这完全是不明智的方式，” Tan告诉Cointelegraph。 “实际背景是这不是有争议的，而且从未被认为是安全性。”

The lawyer said US securities law is focused on regulating investments and not compensating creators for their work.

律师说，美国证券法的重点是规范投资，而不是赔偿创作者的工作。

“The artist or creator is not an investor, not a passive third party in the NFT,” he said, noting that royalty payments are not considered investment income.

他说：“艺术家或创作者不是投资者，不是NFT中的被动第三方。”他指出，特许权使用费不被视为投资收入。

Instead, Tan told Cointelegraph that this type of earning is “analogous to business income,” which the SEC does not regulate. He added:

取而代之的是，谭告诉Cointelegraph，这种类型的收入“类似于商业收入”，而SEC不规范。他补充说：

“If you create a piece of music and someone streams it a million times, the music streaming platform will send you royalties from the streaming fees. No one will say that the streaming platform’s token is a security.”

“如果您创建一首音乐，并且有人将其播放了一百万次，那么音乐流媒体平台将向您发送流媒体费用的特许权使用费。没有人会说流媒体平台的令牌是安全性。”

Tan explained that the legal distinction becomes more complicated when NFTs promise shared profits from royalties to multiple holders beyond the original creator.

谭解释说，当NFTS承诺从特许权使用费到原始创造者以外的多个持有人的共同利润时，法律区别变得更加复杂。

Tan also urged regulators and market participants to apply traditional legal reasoning to new blockchain technologies. “Ask yourself, if this were done by pen and paper, would there still be a regulatory issue?” he said. “If none, slow down.”

谭还敦促监管机构和市场参与者将传统的法律推理应用于新的区块链技术。 “问问自己，如果这是通过笔和纸来完成的，是否还有一个监管问题？”他说。 “如果没有，请放慢脚步。”

Related: SEC charges Unicoin crypto platform over alleged $100 million fraud

相关：SEC收取Unicoin Crypto平台，涉嫌1亿美元欺诈

OpenSea calls on the SEC to exempt NFT marketplaces from oversight

Opensea呼吁SEC豁免NFT市场的监督

While NFT royalties may not have been a controversial SEC issue, NFT marketplaces are a different case. In August 2024, NFT trading platform OpenSea received a Wells notice from the SEC, alleging that NFTs traded on the marketplace could qualify as unregistered securities.

尽管NFT特许权使用费可能不是一个有争议的SEC问题，但NFT市场是不同的情况。 2024年8月，NFT交易平台Opensea收到了SEC的Wells通知，声称在市场上交易的NFTS可以作为未注册的证券资格。

On Feb. 22, OpenSea CEO Devin Finzer announced that the SEC has officially closed its investigation into the platform. The executive said that this was a win for the industry.

2月22日，Opensea首席执行官Devin Finzer宣布，SEC已正式关闭了对该平台的调查。高管说，这是该行业的胜利。

Following the conclusion of the SEC’s investigation, OpenSea’s lawyers penned a letter to Peirce, who leads the SEC’s Crypto Task Force. OpenSea general counsel Adele Faure and deputy general counsel Laura Brookover said in an April 9 letter that NFT marketplaces don’t qualify as brokers under U.S. securities laws.

在SEC的调查结束后，Opensea的律师写信给Peirce，后者领导了SEC的加密工作组。 Opensea总法律顾问Adele Faure和副总法律顾问Laura Brookover在4月9日的信中说，NFT Marketplaces没有根据美国证券法的经纪人资格。

The lawyers said the marketplaces don’t execute transactions or act as intermediaries. The lawyers urged the SEC to “clearly state that NFT marketplaces like OpenSea do not qualify as exchanges under federal securities laws.”

律师说，市场不会执行交易或充当中介。律师敦促美国证券交易委员会（SEC）“明确指出，像Opensea这样的NFT市场没有根据联邦证券法的交流资格。”