Like trivially, the idea that code can be a contract, rather than just something that memorializes a contract (like a PDF of an agreement) or a means of executing a contract (the way a Fexex truck delivers products to you).
Al,
That is exactly how I see it, once again another KISS moment. I never said other wise. There is a contract there.
The tokens aren’t the animations. You’re not selling animations - you’re selling tokens.
Al,
First another KISS moment. But that aside.
I sell prints. I make a digital file and then license the images on the prints. The people selling the print pay me the licensing fee. All I have is a digital file and the copyright of my property on the digital file the aesthetic.
I will be selling a specific copy of the digital file of the animation. I am selling the animation.
How am I not selling the animation? Yes I can sell the animation endlessly as copies, hence copyrights.
I will see your video tomorrow. It is 1035 here in Dublin currently.
I agree expert legal advice is necessary.
I have a second business a partnership in the industry that I can not detail here. We will be needing extreme guidance on the legalities. It is a huge job.
I have discussed and read extensively on the topic. I am not trained in the law that does not count for a larger venture.
As has been in the industry the legalities were handled like crap. For the most part the legalities are still handled like crap. I am totally aware of that. I am taking a less worn path to cover as many of those bases as possible.
I am doing so seeking legitimacy. Not with you reading this. I am seeking legitimate transactions. The next generation Arweave, Atomic and Koii have worked hard to address their individual unique problems in the chain of minting an NFT. While I am not excellent in describing their processes, these companies have come a good distance. The legal issues presented by Al over complicate things. What I am doing is using one copy and selling it.
The value of that copy is based on the value in the marketplace. Digital files for a print are limited in their licensing to the value of a premium over the price of the print. The value of prints is low because the supply is endless.
Copies of the digital file for printing can be endless. Same for a work of art used in an NFT. But that singular copy has a different function. As the recognized copy for the NFT if the marketplace values the art then the NFT or token is more special in the marketplace.
Marketplaces and art are speculative. This may frustrate some here. The value dropping out of an NFT is based on changes in the marketplace that are speculative.
Most NFT and their denoting art have no value. This may confuse some who are worried in the first place. There are often reasons why a work of art associated with an NFT has value. Most laypeople looking wont see or get the reasons for themselves. Most will distrust the rational given by someone who knows. The market giving high values is always labeled as a con by the laypeople. That is necessarily true.
Understanding the value or lack of value in a work of art matters. If you can not understand art appraisal then this conversation seems to label any of a con. That is common.
I will be selling a specific copy of the digital file of the animation. I am selling the animation.
Because that’s not how NFT’s work. You’re not selling a digital file of the animation. You’re selling a token on the blockchain. That token will probably contain metadata describing the animation - but the purchaser isn’t getting any ownership rights in that metadata, or the animation. They’re not even getting a copy of the file.
Have you spent any time actually learning about what an NFT actually is, technically? You can’t just say KISS and make the actual properties of the NFT disappear, or become irrelevant. I’m hardly an expert on NFT’s, but (again) I think you’re making some statements that are inconsistent with the core concepts of what these things are.
Albaby
They’re not even getting a copy of the file.
Al,
Again you are missing it. Yes they are getting a copy of the animation. With Atomic it is bundled as a digital file with the contract. In computer language or APIs things are within reach. More than so than a title deed for a property you handle that is not stored on the site of the property being bought.
I agree with the IPFS format you’d be right. That is the majority of cases so far. I know better.
Let me put it this way. When I sell an image of mine as a print through my distributor the canvas with the image is shipped. The digital file I use is shared only with the print on demand company and the print factory the POD company sources. I do not give over the file. The customers get the likeness or a copy of the aesthetic. It is not ownership.
When I sell a print the copyright and ownership does not exchange hands. People still buy the print that is used and give me a premium for the likeness or copy of my artwork. It is not the original. I claim they get a copy. No sweat so what? I have sold a print for as much as $1750. Only $250 of that was the canvas costs. My pay was $1500. I set my prices.
It is totally good with me I am using my art to uniquely denote a token and sell it with the contract and a copy of the digital file using Atomic and the ultra long storage of Arweave.
Remember with Arweave’s foundation, or that sort of thing, the one time payment means I can push off or whatever and the storage is not interrupted for the future token owners. The server operators can come and go and the redundancies built into the storage will see the storage transferred into those longer terms realities with success.
Remember any canvas oil painting can get destroyed just as easily as all of your concerns about how trustworthy buying a digital good is for over one century.
The reason I am saying KISS is because you are chase your tail in your reasoning. You have a bias that every aspect of this is quicksand. You are not predicating anything in any other regard. With Arweave/Atomic/Koii that is not true. I can not go along in my own case with any of your scenarios.
OTOH I totally agree with you when people use the IPFS you are totally correct. If that is all you are addressing we are in agreement.
I will go you one better. Opensea suggests using Pinata with the IPFS storage. Pinata needs monthly payments to “pin” the file in the file system. The reason, the IPFS has a delete system that deletes anything eventually if it is not pinned. There is some tricky literature saying that your file wont disappear. But I get the sense that unless I make payments to Pinata for the rest of my life my file would be deleted. Opensea is a bit suspect to me literally pushing Pinata in the big print and mentioning Arweave as something Opensea will work with in the small print. Oy!! Pinata is so expensive I do not trust Opensea in this process.
Between us there is a mix of things happening here. You have an education in the law enough here to be dangerous. I have studied this intelligently enough to be dangerous. Neither of us are experts in the actual law. Most of the law is actually ahead and not on the books yet.
I am not sure there is any such thing as a legal expert in this because there have been very few precedents yet. There are only the beginnings of any rulings. We both see this as a disaster for the majority usage IPFS. It is a disgusting system.
Al et al, my comparison to equity markets is better suited to a comparison of crypto to the options market.
Crypto/NFTs are in no way like the options market. Options are a [literal] contract between two people (generalized, since there is a 3rd party that matches those people) that the seller gives the buyer the right to take an action as specified in the option. And when that option is exercised, the property literally changes hands (shares, 500 barrels of oil, etc).
On a completely different note - two or so years ago, you voiced the opinion that Trump would never be held criminally liable for anything. What do you think the likelihood is now?
On a completely different note - two or so years ago, you voiced the opinion that Trump would never be held criminally liable for anything. What do you think the likelihood is now?
Since that’s way OT, and probably a bit political, I’ve posted my reply here:
https://discussion.fool.com/criminal-liability-against-trump-351…
Albaby
AD: On a completely different note - two or so years ago, you voiced the opinion that Trump would never be held criminally liable for anything. What do you think the likelihood is now?
So … guess who appointed the current Director of the FBI?
Anymouse <If you said DT, give yourself a gold star>
Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Position
The director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is the head of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the United States' primary federal law enforcement agency, and is responsible for its day-to-day operations. **The FBI Director is appointed for a single 10-year term by the President of the United States and confirmed by the Senate.** The FBI is an agency within the Department of Justice (DOJ), and.