3 ms·
That's the real kicker. This NFT fad isn't about ownership of the underyling asset, it seems more accurate to call it a fiction that has value as a novelty coll
by MaxBarraclough 6y ago
That's the real kicker. This NFT fad isn't about ownership of the underyling asset, it seems more accurate to call it a fiction that has value as a novelty collectible, analogous to baseball cards.
Buying an NFT for a tweet doesn't buy you the copyrights, neither does it buy you the ability to delete the tweet. [0] The true owner of the tweet isn't even obligated not to delete it. [0]
[0] https://www.wired.com/story/nft-art-market-tweets/ https://www.wired.com/story/nft-art-market-tweets/
- qqii 6y agoIt depends on the asset being NFTified. A lot of art NFTs now come with similar licences whereas obviously tweet and collectable NFTs come with their own licences.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- MaxBarraclough 6y agoThen why not just buy the licence/copyrights? Either way, NFTs are just a novelty.