NFT is like a property/patent ownership registry.
Wrong.
Since they claim to be decentralized and we know there is no regulations and law enforcement involved, they do NOT register ownership or anything like that, they only
create illusion of it.
Any registry on any of these platforms could be duplicated multiple times on the same platform or other platforms. For example those selling "art NFT" can easily sell it more than once to more than one person on one or more token platform and there is absolutely nothing stopping them from doing so.
the idea is that because its a public ledger, it can be used like a copyright
timestamp. where a file has a unique id for the exact bytes meaning if 2 items are the same, only one can be 'owned', which is usually the first one seen
if seen being sold on a different ledger claiming to be a property registry, then you take them to court displaying your proof of timestamp ownership preceeds some other person trying to sell something with same hash id.
a standard old fashioned copyright/patent office also does not have law enforcement involved by default. they are just the register, not the law enforcement, they have no authority to chase after people..
taking someone to court is a separate activity done by the owner, not the registry officeof course the flaws are:
1) its like a patent/copyright register.. no one ever said the old fashioned copyright register has the courtroom/punishment attached to it by default, it requires humans to make the connection between a product and a timestamp and ownership proof, and then more human activity to still find the real life human 'thief/counterfeiter' and serving them a court order to appear
in both standard copyright cases and NFT cases.
2) just change one byte of the file, changes the hash. thus not selling the same 'hash'. thus easy to counter the hash log and sell duplicates.
funnily enough, artists are doing this, selling a graphic character with a very slight difference. thus breaking any copyright possible claim of 'similar work'/counterfeit. by validating that altering just the most insignificant detail makes it unique. thus harder to then claim copyright ownership in court because a slightest most insignificant change, is treated as unique work, not similar work in the nft world.
3) it requires watching every market and site offering products(much the same as old fashioned copright), IF you do spot it then it comes into the counterfeit, plagiarism, copyright arena debate in court of how close to the other art is the second piece copying.(then see flaw (2)&(1) for how thats not automatic and not easy either)
4) if there are other copyright ledgers(nft ledger) its then even less easy to spot(3) unless you are watching every ledger and knowing what is associated with the hashes to compare to the one on the ledger you use,(then see flaw (2)&(1) for how thats not automatic and not easy either)
you are right that ledgers cant do much, ledgers are not a court that hand out penalties like prison terms so it does require old fashioned things like human watchers, moderators and real world courts.
you are also right that there can be a bitcoin backed NFT copyright ledger, heck there is already polygon, klaytn and a ethereum copyright ledger. (much like europe, asia, uk and US have separate old fashioned copyright registries) where jurisdictions and courts then having the hassle of proving which one is the true first and true owner (which is not automatic(see flaw (2) and (1))
My major problem with NFTs is how to market them on opensea. I find it difficult to understand how it is been done.
alot of the large news media sensational headline stories, are where funds 'spent' are actually people buying their own art to get some viral news story recognition.(hint, a tactic marykeller can try)
thus not costing anything. the buyer is the seller, the seller is the buyer. so no real cost bar the 'gas'
yes this tactic is not new.
ebay used to have people selling things to themselves to show a ebay 'sold' listing at a high price, to then have them going out to other markets or seen in news media, to then list the product again trying to get others to buy for similar high price using the first 'sold' listing' as the valuator
.. also some of the items are sold to themselves multiple times to show fake volume to get listed higher listing pages.
(most of the news media viral stories, are not idiots buying something expensive, but business minded people shuffling their own funds back to themselves to trigger a fake listed value)
that said, even when ebay was listing things like a UK 50pence piece for £500. not many actually fell into that trick, not many actually paid £500 for something really worth 0.1% of 'sold listed' price, it was usually just a couple people selling to themselves hundreds of times, to make it appear that there is demand and value in the item
yes media used to show many stories about a 50p worth £500 being sold multiple times.. but there were more news stories advertising the headline, than there were victims of the trick
as for others thinking that alot of money has gone through NFT. .. not really
NFT is not something that actually has 'millions of people', its more like thousands of people pretending to be hundreds of millions of people.
(yea dont worry much about the sudden jump of 'unique ethereum addresses created' from ~1m to ~190m in the last 5 years)
if you look at the blocksize of ethereum. its only average blocks are 150kbytes, meaning very few (dozen a block) transactions are happening per block. so its not really that much activity really happening with not that many people actually buying fresh eth to then move it to then buy nft
