> The reason, I claim, is that the significant thing we humans value when we value art is the expression of an original act of creation, comprised by individual

> The reason, I claim, is that the significant thing we humans value when we value art is the expression of an original act of creation, comprised by individual acts of conception, production, and realization accomplished by some ingenious mind. I completely agree with this, and I think the experiment with NFTs is that perhaps a significant portion of humans will come to consider an NFT issued by an artist as an expression of the the original act of creation of a work, particularly for works that are not inherently instantiated in a unique physical object the way a painting is. It really is that simple: just like monetary valuations of famous paintings, there's no "inherent" correct answer to whether a particular NFT "counts" as a unique representation of the original act of creation of a work. It's just up to people. Remember, even copies of physical works (like lithographs) can command high valuations based on their perceived originality, despite everyone agreeing that they are copies.