> My point is that if you buy a new record from an artist you generally expect it to be original music that’s the product of creativity.
No, you expect it to be one of hundreds to hundreds of thousands of exact copies that anyone else could buy regardless of whether you own a copy or not, and that will usually be repressed if the supply runs dry. It's the product of a record pressing/CD replication machine more than anything else; no creative or original work goes into producing copy 67,904 out of 100,000. There is no expectation that you are paying for original work. The money you spend might go into funding original work, indirectly, but what you're paying for is a copy, and that's also what you generally expect it to be.
If consumers generally each bought the only copy of the records they own, it might have been more relevant.
But again, this thread is about how different separate creative works from one artist are, not how many identical copies of a single work the artist releases.
There’s a limit to artists’ ability to do this. It’s called copyright law and it’s enforced by a central authority. Unfortunately no such central authority exists in the NFT space, so it’s perfectly within anyone’s rights and abilities to copy an artwork and sell it as their own.
Re:Why Web3?
by galaxyLogic on Thursday December 30, 2021 @12:03AM
(#29733815)
When you say "sell an artwork" do you mean sell all rights to it or license its copying for personal use etc? Copyright and contract law still applies. But how does it apply to NFTs?
It doesn’t. Or it will some day, either way, this is the point. It’s still going to require a centralized authority to enforce fair use, ultimately making it no different than any other method of distributing art.
My point is that if you buy a new record from an artist you generally expect it to be original music that’s the product of creativity. But a lot of artists release things that are perceived by many to be very derivative, unoriginal, and not creative.