The ownership is of the NFT itself, not the asset that's linked to in the metadata. I agree with some of the issues you point out, but in this case ownership i

The ownership is of the NFT itself, not the asset that's linked to in the metadata. I agree with some of the issues you point out, but in this case ownership is a construct built on social consensus, and these people are trying to define what "digital ownership" might mean, which you are conflating with physical ownership. "They don't control redistribution". - They very much control it for the NFT itself. Yes, you can right-click and save an image all you want, but that doesn't mean you own the NFT. In fact, you can right-click and save the most valuable NFT in the world, and re-mint it as an NFT... but that NFT would be worthless, because it would be missing the social consensus and provenance that gave the original NFT value. Copyright and ownership are divorced from each other already, so this argument feels like a straw man when folks point to it as a failure of NFTs. For example, you can buy an oil painting from an artist, but that doesn't come with a copyright either. Same for almost all physical goods. NFTs though, can have a license attached. A lot of what you are saying is true today, but it might not be tomorrow if enough people agree otherwise. In that respect, this is very much an experiment in speculation, but all it takes is for a community of people to agree to honor the data on a particular blockchain and that can support a thriving economy like NFTs have for the last couple of years.