Despite the common claims that you're buying an image, it's actually much more stupid. You are buying an XML file with a link to an image in it. Anyone is allowed to use the image whatsoever. You do not get claims to the copyright for the image or anything like that.
Not only that, but that XML file itself is also universally accessible, just like the image link, and there is nothing stopping someone from just spamming both the XML and the image everywhere, even from a legal perspective. You buy literally nothing when you buy an NFT. There isn't even a service being purchased, because the XML file was already being hosted before you paid for it.
It's true, but it's not really a big deal. The NFTs are just links pointing to an image, the holder could literally tweet that link and it wouldn't diminish its value because what matters is that the blockchain says that the holder owns that link.
there is no actual contract signed or legal proof of ownership of the NFT. I believe (THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE DO NOT FOLLOW THIS) the hack like the one in the OP cannot be legally punished except for illegal access to the website.
The person who owns the link is whoever is registered as the domain owner in the respective name server. The NFT has nothing more to do with the link than if I pasted it in this post.
that.... that can't possibly be true, right?
it's 100% true
Despite the common claims that you're buying an image, it's actually much more stupid. You are buying an XML file with a link to an image in it. Anyone is allowed to use the image whatsoever. You do not get claims to the copyright for the image or anything like that.
Not only that, but that XML file itself is also universally accessible, just like the image link, and there is nothing stopping someone from just spamming both the XML and the image everywhere, even from a legal perspective. You buy literally nothing when you buy an NFT. There isn't even a service being purchased, because the XML file was already being hosted before you paid for it.
It's true, but it's not really a big deal. The NFTs are just links pointing to an image, the holder could literally tweet that link and it wouldn't diminish its value because what matters is that the blockchain says that the holder owns that link.
there is no actual contract signed or legal proof of ownership of the NFT. I believe (THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE DO NOT FOLLOW THIS) the hack like the one in the OP cannot be legally punished except for illegal access to the website.
The person who owns the link is whoever is registered as the domain owner in the respective name server. The NFT has nothing more to do with the link than if I pasted it in this post.
The blockchain is a big ledger that records transactions, so in theory you always know who "owns" it, even if someone else copies your monkey jpeg