# Blockchain Integration in the Era of Industrial Metaverse
## 5 Blockchain Integration in Metaverse
### Regulatory Challenges Protecting Human Rights in Metaverse  
Three regulatory issues in the metaverse era stand out among others [95]:  
1. Privacy regulations;
2. Copyright laws and regulations;
3. Mechanisms to enforce regulatory regimes.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l} \hline \hline
**Case Study** & **Advantage** & **Ref.** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Data Sharing} & Verify the data review procedure. & [88] \\  & A flexible privacy protection system. & [89] \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Data Storage} & High-efficiency access to data. & [90] \\  & Identify and fix the storage capacity issue with the blockchain. & [91] \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Virtual Economy Ecosystem} & Support anonymous payment. & [92] \\  & Assume machine-to-machine (M2M) and Internet of Things (IoT) payments. & [93] \\ \cline{1-1}  & Encourage a transparent environment for system participation. & [94] \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Typical Blockchain use cases in Metaverse.  
Regarding privacy, it is crucial to remember that public blockchains are truly public, meaning that everyone can see all transaction histories. While transactions can be made anonymous (using cryptographic hashes), assets, tokens, and electronic addresses of the wallets can still be seen. Anytime a specific address is intentionally, unintentionally, or in some other way connected to a specific person, the entire history of prior transactions can be made public. Therefore, it is impossible to guarantee the privacy of current or previous transactions. Despite this, transparency continues to be a valuable asset in the metaverse because it fosters greater trust among all actors, and there should be a good trade-off with privacy.  
Next, Web 3.0 promises to support the creator economy by securing fair use of assets in terms of copyright. However, a rather unexpected NFT-related development has reopened the discussion on content rights in the metaverse. Notably, blockchains were viewed as the best way to prove the provenance of digital assets, allowing creators to track the use and sale of their creative works using specific addresses and cryptographic signatures. Anyone who has created cryptographic signatures, however, is aware that altering even a single bit in a large file will completely alter the hash. Therefore, a famous NFT would technically have a completely different asset as a result of an invisible pixel change. Thus, decisions about originality return to subjective interpretation, which is something we had hoped blockchains would help us avoid.  
The enforceability of regulatory frameworks is another open question. Regulation violations in the Web 2.0 era were easily addressed: the regulator would issue a notice against the violating party, such as a specific company. However, since the metaverse is powered by a blockchain, which is a distributed computing infrastructure that is owned by millions of people, there is no such company in the Web 3.0 era.  
As it regards the ethical challenges of the human-centric metaverse, an open question is, \"What ethical standards and limitations will govern this new cyber-physical metaverse, where identity will be a fluid concept and regulatory oversight will be weak?\"  
What are the standards of conduct that society will accept in order to navigate and feel secure while interacting online? The \"internet of senses\" and haptic feedback will further enhance experiences. It has to be stressed that immersion will be much stronger in the metaverse than it is on the current internet. As such, the possibility of acquiring multiple identities in the metaverse poses fertile ground for new kinds of conflicts of which we are not yet aware. Thus, a solution should be to establish an international committee for such legal issues, similar to the newly established Coordinating Committee for the Governance of Artificial Intelligence (CCGAI) [96].