the DMCA is 24 years old and its current use relies on an internet connection more heavily than onchain NFTs do. what stimuli were you replying to exactly, its not clear to me.
the DMCA relies on something called a law and the power of the State to enforce such law, using the force if necessary.
your suggestion is to give up centuries of refinements on law making/enforcement and rely on personally checking every single trnsaction, because if you don't and are scammed, you're screwed and there's nothing you can do to get your money back.
This thread isn't about NFTs being an improvement over all copyrighted work, this thread is about NFTs being an improvement over other NFTs.
On the consumer side I wasn't suggesting anything, I said what they have to do in response to an already existing market with already existing transactions. This isn't about some future reality we imagine on an internet forum, this is about one you are simply not in.
If you think checking is too hard, then make a service that makes it easier to check and charge people for it, how often do you rule out business models that you personally identify, because thats what the market is saying to do.
It's a spreadsheet that is a list of tokens created by artists, and the corresponding owner in the column to the right. That spreadsheet will survive the bankruptcy of any particular company, which gives the tokens a sense of permanence, and Benjaminian aura if you will, that you don't get from a ledger run by Google.
That is what is is, that is what people find it useful for. It is not supposed to do any other things.
> It's a spreadsheet that is a list of tokens created by artists
or by people that found something slightly interesting and put it on the blockchain for money.
here's no assurance that some artist made it, there's no assurance the author is the one selling it, there's basically no assurance, apart that they are trying to trick people into thinking that it's an investment.
It's, in other words, a scam.
> That spreadsheet will survive the bankruptcy of any particular company
It won't.
Monuments in Rome have survived thousands of years and hundreds of wars.
98% of NFTs will last at max few months
> that you don't get from a ledger run by Google
at least I can sue Google if they publish on their ledger the hash of something I made and someone else sold without my permission...
> That is what is is, that is what people find it useful for
Please, don't try to sell me your snake oil.
That's the opposite of why people want them.
People absolutely don't care about the item, proof is that the majority of items sold as NFTs would never ever have a market outside of the speculative bubble (and in fact they never had one before).
Correct. I do not see how it follows that a NFT minted by the artist who made it is a scam.
> 98% of NFTs will last at max few months
You make this mistake because you think the url matters. It does not. It is the collectors job to ensure the art survives. Agreement on what the token represents, either ad-hoc or through a hash is enough.
> at least I can sue Google if they publish on their ledger the hash of something I made and someone else sold without my permission...
True.
> People absolutely don't care about the item, proof is that the majority of items sold as NFTs would never ever have a market outside of the speculative bubble (and in fact they never had one before).
There is a speculative bubble, but art will remain hard to sell the less it is a short-term speculative investment, but the creation of this previously non-existent market is indeed the contribution here. Without the market, the spreadsheet is not interesting.
your suggestion is to give up centuries of refinements on law making/enforcement and rely on personally checking every single trnsaction, because if you don't and are scammed, you're screwed and there's nothing you can do to get your money back.
I'm not sure it's an improvement.