Interview with Babbitt | The first case of "The Balance Chain" was released, and the blockchain really landed in the judicial field.

On April 9, the first judgment of the Beijing Internet Court using the "balance chain" evidence was released.

Interestingly, the Beijing Internet Court was established on September 9, 2018. Now, after more than half a year, the first case of the judicial chain was born. Why is this?

The “balance chain” is an open platform for electronic evidence based on blockchain technology. According to the official disclosure of the Beijing Internet Court, as of April 11, the “Peace Chain” collected 3,598,143 online data and 657 online evidence verification data. At present, there are 58 cases involving evidence of the balance chain in the Beijing Internet Court. However, due to the powerful “power” of the “balance chain”, the electronic evidence disputes of related cases are very small, and more than 40 pieces have been successfully conciled or withdrawn.

Qi Guiqing, vice president of the Beijing Internet Court, also said at a forum held recently:

“Under the traditional trial mode, it is common to not recognize the authenticity of the evidence. A higher proportion of cases will file an application for appraisal, and there is a certain degree of delay in the litigation. The evidence for verification by the judicial blockchain is higher. Recognition and trust, rarely apply for identification or inspection procedures, the parties perform more honestly, and the goodwill is higher.

Practice has proved that the decentralized trust mechanism, non-tamperable and traceable features of blockchain technology can open up a large application space in the judicial field and objectively promote the establishment of the Internet trust system.

It is the result that the blockchain can be expected to be applied in the judicial field through the pre-rule, the full-chain participation, and the social organization's joint endorsement, and the fair and just rules are embedded in the Internet litigation through the power of technology.

How does the first case of the judicial chain operate?

According to the disclosure of the WeChat public account, the Beijing-French network, there are three links in the case involving the “balance chain”.

Step1: Blue Denim Company previously applied to the copyright owner (third-party depository platform) for electronic evidence storage of the infringed evidence, and obtained the copyright owner's electronic data deposit certificate, which was kept by the copyright owner's trusted deposit certificate system. The copyright chain deposits the summary data of the copyright chain block on the “balance chain” through the cross-chain operation. The “balance chain” returns to the copyright chain a “balance chain” certificate number, and the copyright chain is returned to the user one included in the “ The certificate number on the balance chain and the document number of the deposit number on the copyright chain.


Step2: Through copyright big data monitoring, it is found that the electronic data of the plaintiff involved in the case on the platform is infringed, that is, the relevant infringing picture clues are collected, and the infringing clues are stored on the copyright chain, and the copyright chain will be operated through cross-chain. The summary data of the copyright chain block is stored on the “balance chain”, and the “balance chain” is returned to the copyright chain with a “balance chain” deposit number, and the copyright chain is returned to the user for a deposit contained in the “balance chain”. The number and the number of the license number on the copyright chain.


Step3: When the lawsuit occurred, the plaintiff Blue Denim Company filed the case online through the Beijing Internet Court Electronic Litigation Platform, and submitted the complaint, user authentication information, the original document of the confirmation certificate, the original document of the infringement clue and the blockchain certificate. Numbered file. The Beijing Internet Court's electronic litigation platform retrieved the “balance chain” for automatic verification. The verification results showed that the evidence involved in the case had not been tampered with since the deposit certificate, and the result of the “successful verification” of the blockchain certificate was obtained. .


Babbitt's exclusive interview with the deposit platform of the first case of "Peace Chain", the author of the copyright of CHEN Hao, the copyright owner of the company, and the CEO of the technology provider of "Tianping Chain", Ma Chenyun, explained the application practice of the judicial chain. .

Babbitt: In the first case of the Beijing Internet Court “balance chain”, what are the blockchain technologies reflected in?

Hao Han: The copyright blockchain mainly does three things. The first thing is to confirm the right, that is, when the user's work has just been completed, the work can be uploaded to our server through the APP or website. The blockchain is used for depositing certificates. On the other hand, we will issue digital identity certificates to users and apply for copyright registration certificates issued by the Copyright Office;

The second thing is authorization, which is to prove who your copyright is granted to, and such an electronic contract is also stored in the blockchain;

The third thing is to protect rights. Through our monitoring service, if you find that a user has used your picture but has not obtained the authorization, our system will automatically send an email to the author to remind you if the author wants to pass the judicial proceedings after viewing it in the background. The way to solve it is to fix the evidence of infringement through one-click of our platform, which is also on the blockchain.

The first case of this balance chain was the copyright applied by our system and found the infringement of others. During the litigation process, our copyright blockchain was connected to the Beijing Internet Court through the cross-chain form. "This became the first case."

Babbitt: To what extent does the judicial chain reduce costs and increase efficiency?

Hao Han: It took a period of one to three months for a user to play a case. After accessing the balance chain, it takes only one or two weeks from submitting the materials to the trial. Efficiency is reflected in two aspects. First, the parties do not have to go to the scene, and the video trials have greatly saved social costs. Second, many processes have been pre-positioned. The parties understand the evidence as soon as they look at the evidence, so they do not have to use a lawsuit to mediate privately, and also reduce the workload of the court.

Babbitt: What is the significance of the first case of the "balance chain"?

Hao Han: The first case is of great significance. From a judicial point of view, this Beijing Internet Court has set a model for the industry, from the underlying construction, technical argumentation to access evaluation, trial and judgment, the entire operation process is very rigorous, recently the industry in the UK A major judge issued a document saying that it is necessary to learn the advanced experience of the Chinese Internet court, save costs and improve efficiency.

From the perspective of the blockchain, I think this is a very good attempt and breakthrough. Before the blockchain industry had been looking for a landing scene, such an officially initiated forward application appeared, and the industry was also a stimulant. At the same time, it also provides you with cross-chain practical experience, because there have been many technical discussions on this aspect, but there are almost no cross-chains in real application. After the Beijing Internet Court took the lead in research and discussion, we found a cross-chain approach suitable for our industry. , achieved a good result.

Babbitt: As a technology provider, what do you think of the impact of technological change on the administration of justice?

Ma Chenyun: The impact of technological change on the judiciary is twofold. On the one hand, the development of technology has made disputes and crimes on the Internet more complicated, which has brought confusion and challenges to judicial governance. On the other hand, based on the "balance chain" of blockchain technology, the active management of Internet cases is equivalent to using technical means to solve the problems brought by technology, and the other way is to apply to it.

Babbitt: With the development of blockchain technology, what kind of imagination will the future bring us?

Ma Chenyun: I think the biggest charm of the blockchain lies in the "smart contract", which is equivalent to pre-setting and transparentizing the rules, that is, "code is law". This may be the function of blockchain technology in the administration of justice. The most advanced form.

Imagine a lawyer who writes a program or a programmer with a lawyer's qualification in the future, writes a contract template through a smart contract, and then pays the contract writer by the individual or company that uses the contract template. As a result, lawyers and judges in the traditional sense are unemployed, because smart contract contracts are automatically executed without judgment.

The “balance chain” actually only pre-positions the deposit process. This is the primary application of blockchain technology in the judicial field, but it has already had a great impact. In the future, smart contracts are the pre-position of legal provisions, and the imagination it brings us is enormous.