How do you "own" something that everyone else can consume and replicate? Owning a physical item implies a degree of control over it. Owning a public digital item doesn't seem to grant any kind of control.
I feel like this is a classic case of "tree falls in a forest, does anyone hear it?" where the confusion relies on the word "hear" being used in two ways (objective sound waves travelling through air, vs subjective perception). Is the word "own" being used in two ways here?
I think the point is that NFTs are a way to verifiably prove ownership of a digital asset - i.e. the most recent position on a verified chain of purchases.
It's like, imagine if you bought an original Picasso, but a device existed where someone walking past your house could magic a copy of your painting right into their hands, down to the molecule. Sure, you'd still have the original, but the only way to prove it is by referencing the paper trail from the auction house that you're the last person who purchased it through "official" channels. Same for these NFTs - the blockchain is the irrefutable source of who "officially" owns the art.
Personally, I think this is only a thing because people generally want to show off the fact that they "own" something rather than "just" having it in their house. Like, why bother spending $XX millions on an original painting when you could just pay a talented artist to copy it for you with real paints for a fraction of the cost? As long as you're not trying to pass it off as an original for sale, no one would care if you cloned a famous painting.
It's because being able to show off your name on the "who owns this" line is more important than the actual thing.
I think the folks in the crypto world are using it one way and you're introducing a second meaning. They just mean "own" in the legal-rights way. Like one might "own" a company if they buy all the stock, even if they've never seen it.
> Owning a public digital item doesn't seem to grant any kind of control.
Owning a digital item is basically just buying the copyright. It's not everything, but it's real.
Ownership is, in all cases, a limited right. You can imagine two identical cars parked on the street - you own the first, the second has been abandoned by its owner. It would be equally hard for someone to take either car. Ownership 'just' means you can request the help of civic society in retrieving it.
I feel like this is a classic case of "tree falls in a forest, does anyone hear it?" where the confusion relies on the word "hear" being used in two ways (objective sound waves travelling through air, vs subjective perception). Is the word "own" being used in two ways here?