3 ms·

> NFTs prove neither ownership nor uniqueness Except that's literally what they do, using a combination of digital signatures and timestamp. You can have a cop

by chpmrc 5y ago

> NFTs prove neither ownership nor uniqueness Except that's literally what they do, using a combination of digital signatures and timestamp. You can have a copy of the same NFT even on a different chain but the timestamp will be higher, therefore proving it's not the original. Plus the problem of referencing the content is solved by having all data on chain (likely on layer 2). Recurring problems in the world of art trade such as provenance, certification etc. are elegantly solved by NFTs. > someone copied and pasted this guy’s real-life artwork, created an NFT out of it Ironically that's exactly because the artwork was not (referenced) on chain. If that was the case any subsequent copy would not be recognized as the original because of the timestamp and wouldn't have nearly the same value. That's why a simple digital signature scheme based on something like Keybase wouldn't work. I understand and appreciate the author's skepticism but, IMHO, he did end up looking like David Letterman in that video.

rideontime 5y ago
> Ironically that's exactly because the artwork was not (referenced) on chain. If that was the case any subsequent copy would not be recognized as the original because of the timestamp and wouldn't have nearly the same value. So the solution is that every artist mints every piece they create before showing it to anybody else. All because somebody decided that a "blockchain" is now what determines who created a piece of art. How convenient for the crypto holders.
- chpmrc 5y ago
  The same can very well happen in the real world. I see an artwork online, upload it to my portfolio and claim it's mine. There are then many ways one can prove they are the original author and minting an NFT is just an easier one (assuming the claim doesn't get invalidated off chain). Otherwise it's like dismissing NFTs and not minting your own but then getting upset someone did it on your behalf. You can't have it both ways.
  - rideontime 5y ago
    > You can't have it both ways. Sure I can. I created the art, I own the copyright to it. If I choose not to sell prints of a piece, that doesn't give others the right to do so. Why would NFTs be any different? And yes, somebody could copy my art and sell it on RedBubble. The difference is that nobody's claiming that a RedBubble shop is a definite proof of provenance. (But why not? "First RedBubble store" has the same level of credence as "first minted NFT," and it doesn't even require gas fees!)
    - chpmrc 5y ago
      > I own the copyright to it Copyright is only valid in specific (sometimes geographically limited) legal frameworks and even then there are many nuances to take into account. NFTs are just an easier way to establish ownership within the digital world, regardless of the chain (because of the timestamp I mentioned, since it can obviously be compared across chains). > nobody's claiming that a RedBubble shop is a definite proof of provenance RedBubble, being centralized, cannot be trusted to be a viable proof of provenance due to the possibility of corruption. NFTs don't give anyone any right, they just make it easier to establish (and automate the process of verifying) ownership of a digital piece of content. They are not a replacement for copyright. Practically speaking you have two choices: you only claim copyright on some content, get mad when someone mints an NFT of it, try to identify and sue them (good luck with that) and waste time and money OR you mint an NFT as soon as you decide to publish your work. There is absolutely no incentive in choosing the first option and if you do, well, that's on you.

by chpmrc 5y ago

rideontime 5y ago

> Ironically that's exactly because the artwork was not (referenced) on chain. If that was the case any subsequent copy would not be recognized as the original because of the timestamp and wouldn't have nearly the same value. So the solution is that every artist mints every piece they create before showing it to anybody else. All because somebody decided that a "blockchain" is now what determines who created a piece of art. How convenient for the crypto holders.

chpmrc 5y ago
The same can very well happen in the real world. I see an artwork online, upload it to my portfolio and claim it's mine. There are then many ways one can prove they are the original author and minting an NFT is just an easier one (assuming the claim doesn't get invalidated off chain). Otherwise it's like dismissing NFTs and not minting your own but then getting upset someone did it on your behalf. You can't have it both ways.
- rideontime 5y ago
  > You can't have it both ways. Sure I can. I created the art, I own the copyright to it. If I choose not to sell prints of a piece, that doesn't give others the right to do so. Why would NFTs be any different? And yes, somebody could copy my art and sell it on RedBubble. The difference is that nobody's claiming that a RedBubble shop is a definite proof of provenance. (But why not? "First RedBubble store" has the same level of credence as "first minted NFT," and it doesn't even require gas fees!)
  - chpmrc 5y ago
    > I own the copyright to it Copyright is only valid in specific (sometimes geographically limited) legal frameworks and even then there are many nuances to take into account. NFTs are just an easier way to establish ownership within the digital world, regardless of the chain (because of the timestamp I mentioned, since it can obviously be compared across chains). > nobody's claiming that a RedBubble shop is a definite proof of provenance RedBubble, being centralized, cannot be trusted to be a viable proof of provenance due to the possibility of corruption. NFTs don't give anyone any right, they just make it easier to establish (and automate the process of verifying) ownership of a digital piece of content. They are not a replacement for copyright. Practically speaking you have two choices: you only claim copyright on some content, get mad when someone mints an NFT of it, try to identify and sue them (good luck with that) and waste time and money OR you mint an NFT as soon as you decide to publish your work. There is absolutely no incentive in choosing the first option and if you do, well, that's on you.