3 ms·
And yet, NFTs grant no 'rights to use': licensing, copyright, terms of use, or any other legal terms of the sort. At its heart, it's because blockchains are not
by Fellshard 5y ago
And yet, NFTs grant no 'rights to use': licensing, copyright, terms of use, or any other legal terms of the sort. At its heart, it's because blockchains are not widely recognized as legally authoritative. They /cannot be/, since there is no guarantee that an image is uniquely identified by one NFT across all blockchains, and therefore a court would be required to pick and choose 'winners' when considering which blockchain rightly determines ownership.
- rodiger 5y agoIndividual companies/orgs can confer rights to holders through their T&Cs, but that's revocable and hard to prove. For example: https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms https://boredapeyachtclub.com/#/terms BAYC gives full commercial rights to holders. Would be really interesting to actually see that challenged in a court.
- im_down_w_otp 5y agoBack in the 1990's we used to call things like that "license keys".
- scoutt 5y agoAs I said, I don't know much about NFTs and I was just commenting out of curiosity. I have no stakes in NFTs. But if the problem is legal (and not technological) then it may be just a matter of time, given enough adoption. Much like Bitcoins (now running as an official currency of El Salvador). Perhaps it's a matter of establishing we run on this or that blockchain to make NFTs completely traceable?