Yeah I thought of that I'm just curious how copyright law interacts/protects NFTs lol
Like the original art would be protected, but the NFT is supposedly a representation of data which wouldn't I don't think.
Does copyright transfer with "ownership" of the NFT? If so is it separate from the original art? If not then would the original creator still hold that control over the market? What are you even buying then?
I could imagine this going to court and a judge just stroking out trying to deal with it.
An NFT in itself doesn't affect copyright although one could imagine a license agreement involving an NFT. That would however be completely up to what the parties involved have agreed on. At the end of the day the important thing is what was agreed, not what cryptographic fad was attached to the agreement.
It's like a comic book or an action figure. You can reprint an issue of Spiderman a million times, but the nerds who collect them only care about the Official First Print in the Wrapping etc.
I once held an old piece of wood worth over $300,000. That piece of wood was also held by Babe Ruth, which is what made it "worth" that. "Collectibles" anything is such a weird market.
But it's the age, condition and rarity of physical items like (comic) books, coins or stamps that makes them valuable, none of which are a factor with digital files
Unless you have a jpg that's been compressed a billion times like an image macro from 2009
With JPGs it's the 1s and 0s that "prove" you had "the best one".
The image itself is basically irrelevant. NFTs are basically just Shitcoins with unique stampings, maybe like buffalo nickels or those wheat pennies is a better analogy than comic books. Or video game characters skins.
Collectors don't care, they just want a complete set of whatever they collect. Speculators care, because they want the best possible price.
Look into the idiotic concept of slabbing and grading comic books, which makes them unreadable, destroying the literal function they were created for, but somehow preserving their "value".
Collectors aren't the people that care about that, they're just trying to have things complete for OCD/sentimentality/preservation reasons.
Is there anything stopping me from making an NFT that just steals the art from a bunch of other NFTs
deleted by creator
Yeah I thought of that I'm just curious how copyright law interacts/protects NFTs lol
Like the original art would be protected, but the NFT is supposedly a representation of data which wouldn't I don't think.
Does copyright transfer with "ownership" of the NFT? If so is it separate from the original art? If not then would the original creator still hold that control over the market? What are you even buying then?
I could imagine this going to court and a judge just stroking out trying to deal with it.
deleted by creator
An NFT in itself doesn't affect copyright although one could imagine a license agreement involving an NFT. That would however be completely up to what the parties involved have agreed on. At the end of the day the important thing is what was agreed, not what cryptographic fad was attached to the agreement.
For complex matters, judges can sit back and let the lawyers put forward submissions and base their judgement on whichever of those they prefer.
It's like a comic book or an action figure. You can reprint an issue of Spiderman a million times, but the nerds who collect them only care about the Official First Print in the Wrapping etc.
I once held an old piece of wood worth over $300,000. That piece of wood was also held by Babe Ruth, which is what made it "worth" that. "Collectibles" anything is such a weird market.
But it's the age, condition and rarity of physical items like (comic) books, coins or stamps that makes them valuable, none of which are a factor with digital files
Unless you have a jpg that's been compressed a billion times like an image macro from 2009
:dprk-soldier: compressed you say?
With JPGs it's the 1s and 0s that "prove" you had "the best one".
The image itself is basically irrelevant. NFTs are basically just Shitcoins with unique stampings, maybe like buffalo nickels or those wheat pennies is a better analogy than comic books. Or video game characters skins.
Valuable to collectors. We're talking about value to tech bros, which has literally zero basis in reality
Collectors don't care, they just want a complete set of whatever they collect. Speculators care, because they want the best possible price.
Look into the idiotic concept of slabbing and grading comic books, which makes them unreadable, destroying the literal function they were created for, but somehow preserving their "value".
Collectors aren't the people that care about that, they're just trying to have things complete for OCD/sentimentality/preservation reasons.