There is only one patent office per country and one trademark office per country. (It may be more complicated.) And if you ignore the patent/trademark office in your country, they can call some people with tanks to go to your home and ask nicely to follow the patent/trademark rules. (It may be more complicated.)
And there are rules about how the trademarks/patents from one country applies in other countries. (IIRC you must fill some paperwork in every country, but copyright is similar and easier to extend globally.)
Anyway, everyone can create a new chain of NFT, so the same object can be NFTed in many blockchains. Specially because some NFT implementations don't even ask if you are the creator of the digital object.
Those are (a) very heavily regulated by definition and (b) means to an end, which is to create societal good, ie, foster innovation (I don’t want to argue whether that’s actually the case - I’m just taking the statu quo position)
Yes. a) is very heavily regulated by the chain/protocol used to make the tokens work and b) would be to introduce scarcity to digital items, which possibly creates good and fosters innovation (I similarly don't want to argue whether that will actually be the case) in fields which benefit from scarcity.
b isn’t the case, because a is entirely self-referential. Anyone can any any time create a new private key, so you can only trust things signed with private keys you already trust. That trust can be another private key signing it, but ultimately the foundation of the trust is in the physical world where someone can lock you up for breaking rules.
I’m equivocating if this is the is/ought problem or the Münchhausen trilemma, kinda feels like both.
In the case of artists the foundation of the trust relies on the fact that the token is only valuable if it comes from the artist. This doesn't involve locking anyone up, as tokens created by people who aren't the artists are simply ignored since they inherently have no value.
There's no reason to assume that in other domains what you said should be the case more often than what I said if we both don't know the details of said domains.
With NFTs it's just like getting rid of the "shackles" of a government-controlled fiat currency: you no longer can rely on the guns and legal system of that country to enforce any sort of exclusivity.
The extent that you can or cannot trust the guns and legal system of your country is utterly unchanged. They, for any value of “they”, can still roll up to your door, point a gun at you, and order you to do stuff with your tokens. If “they” have legal powers, sucks to be you; if “they” are criminals, you have the same opportunities as before to use the law to recover your assets.
And there are rules about how the trademarks/patents from one country applies in other countries. (IIRC you must fill some paperwork in every country, but copyright is similar and easier to extend globally.)
Anyway, everyone can create a new chain of NFT, so the same object can be NFTed in many blockchains. Specially because some NFT implementations don't even ask if you are the creator of the digital object.