4 ms·

The NFT is just an entry in a ledger. What rights the buyer has to the intellectual property that is your photo is decided by your respective jurisdictions. In

The NFT is just an entry in a ledger. What rights the buyer has to the intellectual property that is your photo is decided by your respective jurisdictions. In general, I would think this is largely up to you - i.e. only the rights you explicitly granted. However, I believe in the US, there is no right to even download a copy of a file on the internet for purely personal reasons. I could see an NFT buyer successfully argue in court that this right is implied, even if not specified. What happens if the file goes offline? I would think that this will not effect an existing license that you have previously granted. Of course, the buyer may struggle to make use of their license rights if they did not retain a copy of the image themselves.

shagie 5y ago
> In general, I would think this is largely up to you - i.e. only the rights you explicitly granted. Do you have any examples of an NFT that grant rights accompanied by TOS terms for minting the NFT that affirm that it is the original artist or someone who is authorized to do so who is creating it? > However, I believe in the US, there is no right to even download a copy of a file on the internet for purely personal reasons. There is de minimis which isn't so much a right but rather a "this is beneath the concern of the law". As to the US aspect, every country that is a signatory of the Berne Convention ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention ) recognizes the minimum standard for protection which includes the right to to make replications or display to the public that is held as part of copyright. For an NFT, would a baseball card be an acceptable comparison for what it represents in the real world? To that end, I would contend that the same thing happens to it when the player that it represents (there is no ownership conveyed in a baseball card beyond the card itself) leaves the game.
- galaxyLogic 5y ago
  It's interesting to think NFTs as digital baseball cards. Both (can) have scarcity. But baseball cards also have physicality. They are close to our world we can see them and turn them around. Physicality gives them desirable properties like easily carrying them around, no computer required. A physical thing is unique. Any sequence of bits on the other hand can always be copied.

shagie 5y ago

> In general, I would think this is largely up to you - i.e. only the rights you explicitly granted. Do you have any examples of an NFT that grant rights accompanied by TOS terms for minting the NFT that affirm that it is the original artist or someone who is authorized to do so who is creating it? > However, I believe in the US, there is no right to even download a copy of a file on the internet for purely personal reasons. There is de minimis which isn't so much a right but rather a "this is beneath the concern of the law". As to the US aspect, every country that is a signatory of the Berne Convention ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention ) recognizes the minimum standard for protection which includes the right to to make replications or display to the public that is held as part of copyright. For an NFT, would a baseball card be an acceptable comparison for what it represents in the real world? To that end, I would contend that the same thing happens to it when the player that it represents (there is no ownership conveyed in a baseball card beyond the card itself) leaves the game.

galaxyLogic 5y ago
It's interesting to think NFTs as digital baseball cards. Both (can) have scarcity. But baseball cards also have physicality. They are close to our world we can see them and turn them around. Physicality gives them desirable properties like easily carrying them around, no computer required. A physical thing is unique. Any sequence of bits on the other hand can always be copied.