• luciferofastora@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    So by the landlord analogy, if you were to “steal” the image and save a copy, you’d be the equivalent of squatters?

    Except the comparison between “stealing” an NFT and squatting is the same as between pirating and movie and stealing a car, in that the owner of the digital object doesn’t actually lose anything like the physical one does.

    • Capricorn_Geriatric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      The fact a land deed and an NFT do the same thing (serve as a proof of ownership) doesn’t mean a photo is land.

      Ownership comes in different forms, and each is specific in a multitude of regards, including crimes against them. Land, vehicles, phones, money, art, IP,… Each slightly different from the rest. I nowhere made the equivalence you did. I merely said an NFT is like a land deed in that it “proves” “ownership”, whatever that may mean. Nothing more, nothing less.

      Anyone who ever did a squat at the gym is a criminal by your logic.

      • luciferofastora@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I nowhere made the equivalence you did

        No, indeed you didn’t. It was my attempt at understanding just what ownership means in this case. Clearly, I didn’t. I’m still not sure I do.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 day ago

      I think a better analogy is with IRL art.

      A bunch of art in museums and galleries does not belong to the museum or the gallery, but rather to private parties. These parties own the art and have a document proving it, but anybody can visit the museum/gallery and photograph the art, or even purchase reproductions of the art.

      NFT is the document proving ownership.