Well, it's some type of digital proof that you 'own' the 'linked' thing. So in case you buy a NFT for a Rolex with serial number 1234, then this NFT proves you

Well, it's some type of digital proof that you 'own' the 'linked' thing. So in case you buy a NFT for a Rolex with serial number 1234, then this NFT proves you own that rolex. And then you can say, if I give you a fake Rolex with serial 1234, it is a problem. So that example would work. But most (by very far) NFT's that are 'proofs' that you own some PNG of an ape or what not and the author of the article was specifically talking about those. And there the example doesn't work; the NFT refers to an digital image, not a physical object and that image you can copy or link and so your ownership means absolutely nothing at all as there is no notion of fake. You could argue (not sure how far that would get in court) that you own the license to that image and if someone uses that image, you can go after them, but still, that's not faking anything.