This is fascinating[1].

Anyone who knows anything about copyright law laughs their arses off, of course (and here's a primer for anyone who needs it[2]).

But this *is* dangerous. A lot of people have no clue, copyright is byzantine in its complexity, and it just takes a few ill-informed judges to make this into a thing. And coinbros will push their bullshit, whether they know they're wrong or not.

[1] source:
[2] NFTs and copyright:



@rysiek yeah just like if you couldn't take a picture of a painting. You might not own it but you can still take a picture of it that's not theft. I'm not stealing the joconde painting by taking a picture of it. Once you compare with things in the real world its easier to understand.

@tursiops it's incomparable. Comparing NFTs to physical art is dangerous, I feel, as it adds credibility: "see, you *can* own art".

It erases the mental jump between owning a physical object and sharing its apparition on one hand, and "owning" a digital image and sharing its copy.

And that's a huge difference that needs not be erased.

@tursiops @rysiek This cartoon literally just explained nfts to me better than entire articles have.

@rysiek Man, you keep coming up with good points in this thread. I thought it actually removed credibility, because you *do* own a physical object, and me taking a picture of it cannot change that. It proves that copying isn't stealing, and that ideas can't be sold, since when someone takes your idea, you still have it.

But it's true most people seem to react to that like "Oh wow I didn't realize taking photos was stealing. I better go after people who do that now!" so you have a point...

@rysiek The fact that not even half of that map is green...

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Generic Mastodon instance hosted by the FairSocialNet association.