[stan_rogers]

None, really. People will still pay extraordinary amounts of money for old documents with shaky provenance on the basis that they'll have it and you can't, only to find out they've been duped. T'was ever and t'will ever be thus.

[sokoloff]

At least people know an NFT is genuine when people pay extraordinary amounts for a number on the basis that they’ll have it and you “can’t”.

[simonh]

An NFT is just a number on a ledger. The fact it represents ownership of anything is an agreement, and there’s nothing about the NFT itself that enforces that agreement. What are you going to do about it if someone, maybe the artist or their estate decides to disagree?

[sokoloff]

I agree of course. That’s what the quotes around ‘can’t’ was intended to convey.

[amyjess]

Given that most NFTs of artwork are created without the knowledge or permission of the artist, I wouldn't call them genuine either.

[input_sh]

Except everyone has access to any NFT in the same quality as its "owner", you just have to look up the transaction to access it.