4 ms·

His argument bases on the presumption that the counterfeit and the real thing are very close in quality as to be indistinguishable. You can sell the real item

by ww520 5y ago

His argument bases on the presumption that the counterfeit and the real thing are very close in quality as to be indistinguishable. You can sell the real item and keep wearing the counterfeit and nobody is any wiser, or vice versa. Whether you keep the "real" item to wear or wear a counterfeit is inconsequential. The real value of the item passes along with the NFT to the new owner. The remaining item whether is real or not has vastly less value. The economic incentive of counterfeiting is ruining in that the counterfeiter cannot sell 1000 counterfeits with the full price as the real item.

sudosysgen 5y ago
In general for these goods the use value comes with the visual signaling. No one is going to check that the NFT is owned by you in public. The other value comes with being able to enjoy the utility of the good without risking someone noticing you're wearing a counterfeit. Again, no one's going to check that you hold the NFT. In that sense, it makes the counterfeit's value higher.
- ww520 5y ago
  The visual signaling isn't that because NFT is a new thing. Someone will come up with NFT based visual signaling pretty soon.
systoll 5y ago
> Whether you keep the "real" item to wear or wear a counterfeit is inconsequential. The real value of the item passes along with the NFT to the new owner. The remaining item whether is real or not has vastly less value. IE, it assumes that attaching an Hermes NFT to Birkin bags would cause Birkin bags to become worthless. The reduction in incentive to counterfeiters is in direct proportion to a presumed reduction in value of the bags themselves. I think the more likely outcome would be that the NFT is mostly worthless, but wherever things wind up, it remains as two seperate markets. Hermes could probably get someone to pay for NFTs they create. Pretending they’re tied to their other goods just adds reputational risk.

by ww520 5y ago

sudosysgen 5y ago

In general for these goods the use value comes with the visual signaling. No one is going to check that the NFT is owned by you in public. The other value comes with being able to enjoy the utility of the good without risking someone noticing you're wearing a counterfeit. Again, no one's going to check that you hold the NFT. In that sense, it makes the counterfeit's value higher.

ww520 5y ago
The visual signaling isn't that because NFT is a new thing. Someone will come up with NFT based visual signaling pretty soon.

systoll 5y ago

> Whether you keep the "real" item to wear or wear a counterfeit is inconsequential. The real value of the item passes along with the NFT to the new owner. The remaining item whether is real or not has vastly less value. IE, it assumes that attaching an Hermes NFT to Birkin bags would cause Birkin bags to become worthless. The reduction in incentive to counterfeiters is in direct proportion to a presumed reduction in value of the bags themselves. I think the more likely outcome would be that the NFT is mostly worthless, but wherever things wind up, it remains as two seperate markets. Hermes could probably get someone to pay for NFTs they create. Pretending they’re tied to their other goods just adds reputational risk.