> This is just a lie. The token doesn’t convey ownership of then media. There is no rough understanding by which this is true. The debate around this is pretty

> This is just a lie. The token doesn’t convey ownership of then media. There is no rough understanding by which this is true. The debate around this is pretty somewhat tiresome. Yes, you have to buy into the believe that the token represents the media, but it's as good a definition as any because all ways we talk colloquially about "owning" a JPEG are simply not the same as owning a chair. - Copyright is just a set of limited legal rights granted to someone temporarily by certain jurisdictions. It's not the same thing as owning something, which is why we were laughing at the "you wouldn't steal a car" ads in the 2000s. - Actual ownership means having access to a copy of the bytes, which is not perceived as meaningful, and only valuable to the extend that access is otherwise arbitrarily restricted. - You can choose to believe in the artificial scarcity of a certificate of ownership.