I heard a hilarious interview with a musician who said that NFTs would stop music piracy.
I mean, it wasn’t an intentionally funny interview, but the musician completely not understanding NFTs and ranting about how AMAZEBALLS they were made me burst out laughing…
Man, I’m glad I avoided being exploited in such a manner by being a terrible artist.
jostly
1592
Someone might NFT a screenshot of your post!
Hell, since you aren’t really selling the picture, or even the picture of the picture, but really only selling your signature, it isn’t even really piracy, right?
Interesting question, actually, in terms of copyright law. Is a hash a derivative work?
It feels to me like almost the definition of a derivative work.
If I decide to sell the wall of my house, and it just happens to have a Banksy painting on it, I am still selling my wall.
I know that isn’t an exactly similar situation, but it does indeed raise interesting questions.
NFTs don’t make sense. If I’m a digital artist and I create an NFT of a JPEG art piece, what’s to stop me from creating another NFT of a perfectly duplicated JPEG art piece? Isn’t it just like artists selling prints of their work?
I hope people who buy these NFTs don’t think they purchased any rights.
The more NFTs you sell of the same thing (for example prints), the less rare they are and thus the less value they each have.
I imagine that the buyer is not in control of this production process so it’s really a toss up whether the NFT is the only one of the art, or whether in 10 minutes after the sale the artist will chuck out another 999 NFTs.
I would imagine anyone who claims something is a one of a kind then tries to sell 1000 of them doesn’t get far into that 1000, and never sells anything again. If you buy actual art (you know that physical stuff), you know ahead of time if it’s a print or an original.
I collect art and have originals and prints both but in digital art - I’m saying everything is a print.
IMO, if you think of them as a numbered print (conceptually. implementation challenges aside), you’re holding it right.
And sometimes there is declared only one “true” print. I dunno how you really pick the best NyanCat print and say it’s the “original”, but that’s it.
Hell, a NYT columnist sold his article for 560,000. You could print it out and read it. HE thinks it’s not worth nearly that much. But it’s the first NFT ever of anything from the NYT, so some people speculate that as the first of something it may have value in the future. To me that’s still speculation/gambling, but other people have lots of money to play with.
Yeah, abolutely. A 1/1 print can be a thing. Kinda weird, but OK. I also kinda get that a 1/20 might be considered amongst collectors as more valuable than a 12/20 of the same print. I don’t personally care, but can see how others might,
Yup. But as far as I know, you can’t say in either world “This is a 1/1 print” then go print 19 more. I imagine that would get you burned in any art world, which is what I was trying to address as far this is concerned:
I imagine that the buyer is not in control of this production process so it’s really a toss up whether the NFT is the only one of the art, or whether in 10 minutes after the sale the artist will chuck out another 999 NFTs.
Ah, gotcha. Yep, agreed that’s a pretty core part of the social contract.
