3 ms·

Well yes, but the technology behind NFTs is explicitly just for solving the problem of double-spend/duplication. The authenticity is always provided off-chain s

by judge2020 5y ago

Well yes, but the technology behind NFTs is explicitly just for solving the problem of double-spend/duplication. The authenticity is always provided off-chain since identity and reputation is still managed off-chain, so while "is this NFT real or impersonating an existing contract" is off-chain, the "who is currently owner" question is answered on-chain and requires no further trust or approval of the original artist.

acdha 5y ago
But again only for the NFT, not the actual work of art.
- judge2020 5y ago
  Assuming the artist only makes one copy, then it does constitute ownership of the work of art. You might not have copyright over it - an artists selling a painting today doesn't give up copyright (unless they sign it away at sale) - but you effectively own the work of art as if it were a painting. In either situation, you're hoping the original artist doesn't go and recreate it to sell it again.
  - acdha 5y ago
    Not without a legal contract. If you don’t have an explicit assignment of ownership, an NFT won’t give it to you. If you do, the NFT isn’t adding anything.
    - judge2020 5y ago
      You don't need an explicit contract, you can purchase something from someone locally with cash and own the item you purchased - it's a legal assignment of ownership in that there was a verbal agreement to purchase something at a specified price. With NFTs, the purchase is even stronger than a verbal agreement since the 'legal contract' is the agreement to sell the NFT as a specified price in digital currency. Once again, ownership doesn't have to mean owning the intellectual property, with an NFT you 'own' the combination of bytes that you purchased, even if you don't have exclusive rights to those bytes and even if the original seller can keep making more of the exact same thing you purchased. It's like how you might 'own' a pair of sneakers - chances are those sneakers weren't produced for your exclusive use and tens of thousands of people also own a pair that looks just like yours, but you have every right to sell your pair and transfer ownership to someone else.
      - acdha 5y ago
        Again, the NFT itself is not adding anything. If you have possession of a physical object or an agreement from someone else transferring rights to you, you don't need an NFT. If you have an NFT, you still need the documentation showing that the person who sold you the NFT had the legal rights to transfer the referenced object as well as the NFT — otherwise you've paid for a receipt for “Bridge, Brooklyn x1”.
        judge2020 5y ago
        That's only a problem for off-chain objects, and as such, almost all current NFTs are of digital content: usually encoded images.
        acdha 5y ago
        … which are stored off-chain without rights assignments to the NFT holder.

acdha 5y ago

But again only for the NFT, not the actual work of art.

judge2020 5y ago
Assuming the artist only makes one copy, then it does constitute ownership of the work of art. You might not have copyright over it - an artists selling a painting today doesn't give up copyright (unless they sign it away at sale) - but you effectively own the work of art as if it were a painting. In either situation, you're hoping the original artist doesn't go and recreate it to sell it again.
- acdha 5y ago
  Not without a legal contract. If you don’t have an explicit assignment of ownership, an NFT won’t give it to you. If you do, the NFT isn’t adding anything.
  - judge2020 5y ago
    You don't need an explicit contract, you can purchase something from someone locally with cash and own the item you purchased - it's a legal assignment of ownership in that there was a verbal agreement to purchase something at a specified price. With NFTs, the purchase is even stronger than a verbal agreement since the 'legal contract' is the agreement to sell the NFT as a specified price in digital currency. Once again, ownership doesn't have to mean owning the intellectual property, with an NFT you 'own' the combination of bytes that you purchased, even if you don't have exclusive rights to those bytes and even if the original seller can keep making more of the exact same thing you purchased. It's like how you might 'own' a pair of sneakers - chances are those sneakers weren't produced for your exclusive use and tens of thousands of people also own a pair that looks just like yours, but you have every right to sell your pair and transfer ownership to someone else.
    - acdha 5y ago
      Again, the NFT itself is not adding anything. If you have possession of a physical object or an agreement from someone else transferring rights to you, you don't need an NFT. If you have an NFT, you still need the documentation showing that the person who sold you the NFT had the legal rights to transfer the referenced object as well as the NFT — otherwise you've paid for a receipt for “Bridge, Brooklyn x1”.
      - judge2020 5y ago
        That's only a problem for off-chain objects, and as such, almost all current NFTs are of digital content: usually encoded images.
        acdha 5y ago
        … which are stored off-chain without rights assignments to the NFT holder.