4 ms·

> NFTs are sort of originals There is no such thing as an original digital media asset. The digital media attached to an NFT is by definition a copy.

yoz-y 5y ago
I tend to agree. There is nothing preventing an artist to sell two NFTs for the same media. Then you would have two competing "originals". Can't do that with a physical object. However it is also progressively harder to prove that a physical thing is actually an original.
- detaro 5y ago
  If an artist makes prints another dozen of a printed physical work, asks the factory that made a sculpture to produce another one, ... you would have competing originals too (indeed replacing damaged/destroyed prints sometimes happens, the newly printed taking the place of the destroyed one - otherwise it is considered bad taste for an artist to actually do that). Or an installation piece that everyone could copy by following the setup instructions, but is just "original" if the installer has the artists permission to do so. Or an art film that's sold as a single DVD: surely the physical DVD is not the art piece, but the film is, even though the film on DVD is clearly a copy of a file on the artists computer. Sometimes in art it really comes down to whatever the artist declares to be an original work. (With an NFT you even get a clear order which one was first if you are worried about repeated minting) Not that I'm a big fan of NFTs or anything, but they really are not that different from what already happens in art. (There's also NFTs that are images generated by code that takes where in the blockchain it was added into account - that image has not existed before the NFT was minted)
Grustaf 5y ago
I said "sort of". The point is that NFTs shouldn't be compared to CD copies, they are more similar to something like the musicians original handwritten music scores in that there's only one of it (and it doesn't confer any licence rights to the buyer).

yoz-y 5y ago

I tend to agree. There is nothing preventing an artist to sell two NFTs for the same media. Then you would have two competing "originals". Can't do that with a physical object. However it is also progressively harder to prove that a physical thing is actually an original.

detaro 5y ago
If an artist makes prints another dozen of a printed physical work, asks the factory that made a sculpture to produce another one, ... you would have competing originals too (indeed replacing damaged/destroyed prints sometimes happens, the newly printed taking the place of the destroyed one - otherwise it is considered bad taste for an artist to actually do that). Or an installation piece that everyone could copy by following the setup instructions, but is just "original" if the installer has the artists permission to do so. Or an art film that's sold as a single DVD: surely the physical DVD is not the art piece, but the film is, even though the film on DVD is clearly a copy of a file on the artists computer. Sometimes in art it really comes down to whatever the artist declares to be an original work. (With an NFT you even get a clear order which one was first if you are worried about repeated minting) Not that I'm a big fan of NFTs or anything, but they really are not that different from what already happens in art. (There's also NFTs that are images generated by code that takes where in the blockchain it was added into account - that image has not existed before the NFT was minted)

Grustaf 5y ago

I said "sort of". The point is that NFTs shouldn't be compared to CD copies, they are more similar to something like the musicians original handwritten music scores in that there's only one of it (and it doesn't confer any licence rights to the buyer).