[frobisher]

The Mona Lisa is a physical "rivalrous" good, meaning if I own it, you cannot.

Digital goods are "non-rivalrous", so although NFTs can give a psychological feeling of ownership, I wouldn't say they make digital goods rivalrous.

I think digital NFTs only make sense in two ways: (1) psychological feelings of ownership, (2) perhaps a claim on something digital that _can_ be made rivalrous, for instance royalty streams. If these are subject to a smart contract that ensures one entity gets them, for example.

[TheColorYellow]

Digital ownership expressed through blockchain could certainly make it more difficult for others to own the good. This would be dependent on the configuration of the NFT, but if done this way it certainly would meet the definition of a rivalrous good.

Music that requires you to present a private key in order to play it would meet that configuration, for example.

[electriclove]

Scarcity and print # allow for making them rivalrous (e.g., only 200 numbered cards).

Royalty models have been tried where the owner of the original receives 90% of the sale of a digital print. See eulerbeats.com

Basically, I agree with your points and there are already active efforts in these areas that will make some NFT efforts very viable.

[scsilver]

Do people own the mona lisa in their home or do they have a curator hold it for them and their ownership is backed by a contract in the current legal system?