I love NFTs, but proof that we are in a crypto art bubble 😂

Ich liebe NFTs, sehe auch sehr großes Potential in NFTs, NFT Games (Splinterlands) und CryptoArt-Plattformen, aber dieser Tweet ist einfach ein großer Schwachsinn.

NFTs haben dann einen Wert, wenn sie einen Nutzen generieren, wenn sie zum Beispiel einen Domain-Namen oder eine virtuelle oder reale Immobilie repräsentieren oder man mit den NFTs ein #play2earn Game wie Splinterlands @splinterlands oder dCity @dcitygame spielen kann.

Demgegenüber haben die meisten CryptoArt-NFTs auf Ethereum nicht einmal Nutzungsrechte. Diese Kunst-NFTs von unbekannten Künstlern ohne kommerzielle Nutzungsrechte sind absolut nicht mit Ethereum oder Tesla vergleichbar.

Wenn allerdings Kunst-NFTs in Zukunft auch an kommerzielle Nutzungsrechte geknüpft werden, dann könnten einzelne NFTs wie zum Beispiel ein NFT eines Songs plötzlich durchaus enorme Wertsteigerungen erfahren.

Stellt euch vor, ihr könnt ein Song-NFT kaufen und den Song dann plötzlich legal auf YouTube als Hintergrundmusik für eure Videos verwenden und jederzeit beweisen, dass ihr die Nutzungsrechte besitzt. Das wäre großartig.

Was sagt ihr dazu?

NFT / CryptoArt bubble territory?

twitter-realmissnft-210810-1.jpg

https://twitter.com/vikisecretscom/status/1425128423496769543

https://twitter.com/RealmissNFT/status/1426109708075732992

English

I love NFTs, see great potential in NFTs, NFT Games (Splinterlands) and CryptoArt platforms, but this tweet is just b/s.

NFTs have value when they generate utility, for example when they represent a domain name, a virtual or real property/land or you can play a #play2earn game like Splinterlands @splinterlands or dCity @dcitygame with them.

In contrast, most CryptoArt NFTs on Ethereum do not even have usage rights. These art NFTs by unknown artists without commercial usage rights are absolutely not comparable to Ethereum or Tesla.

However, if art NFTs are also linked to commercial usage rights in the future, then individual NFTs such as an NFT of a song could suddenly experience enormous gains in value.

Imagine you could buy a song NFT and then suddenly use the song legally on YouTube as background music for your videos and prove at any time that you own the usage rights. That would be awesome.

What do you think?

Source

[1] RealmissNFT: Collecting NFTs from upcoming artists today is like buying stocks from Tesla in 2010💜🚀💜 https://twitter.com/RealmissNFT/status/1425101429543477249

Live your Secrets and Hive Prosper 🍯

xx Viki @vikisecrets



0
0
0.000
12 comments
avatar

und den Song dann plötzlich legal auf YouTube als Hintergrundmusik für eure Videos verwenden

Oder Tantiemen eintreiben, wenn jemand anderer es tut!
Ja, das wäre genial. Daher sind die Künstler ja auch darauf bedacht, mit NTFs abzucashen, aber eben NICHT die Nutzungsrechte zu überlassen. Wenn es der Markt toleriert, schön für sie.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

Sehe das wie du, mir würde jetzt nichts gegenteiliges einfallen oder ein Beispiel wieso es ohne Nutzungsrecht oder irgend einem anderen recht (@stayoutoftherz, hat ja Recht auf Tantiemen erwähnt) etwas an Wert haben sollte.

Cool wäre natürlich wenn Künstler quasi ein teil des Werkes verkaufen und man dann eben Einnahmen bekommt.

Also ein Künstler verkauft insgesamt 50% des Songs und dadurch erhalten die Mitinhaber 50% der Einnahmen.

So könnten ggf. kleinere/weniger bekannte Künstler die Produktion finanzieren.

Crowdfounding 3.0?

0
0
0.000
avatar

Ein Kunst-NFT, das den Song finanziert und dann automatisiert an den Tantiemen mitschneidet wäre auch eine coole Sache.

0
0
0.000
avatar

An NFT that grants you the rights to a song is a really interesting idea and a really good use for NFTs. There are definitely uses for them but most are just nonsense. They remind me of the ICOs of 2017 when a new ICO claiming to be the next bitcoin popped up every single day. It was a time of crazy speculative hype bordering on madness hahahaha. That's NFTs right now (or a few months ago at least). Right now people over generalize the idea of NFTs. They talk as if all NFTs are created equal, like it doesn't matter which one you buy as long as it's an NFT. You pointed this idea out perfectly in your response tweet - How do you know which artist is going to be successful? Lol. If only we knew hahah. It's like saying, the best way to get rich is to buy a penny stock that will turn out to be the next Amazon.... it's just that easy lol

0
0
0.000
avatar

Haha, if it only was that easy 😂

0
0
0.000
avatar

Haha yeah. I swear that's the way some people think in the crypto space. It's as bad as when people say things like

"I just did a major technical analysis on coin (XYZ) and the charts are saying that over the next few months we may see the price break resistance or it could break support, but then this line over here suggests that there's a chance that the price will hold for the time being."

And reading that you're like "so you're saying that the price is going to either go up or down or stay the same - okay got it...fucking idiot." 🙄

Hahahaha

0
0
0.000
avatar

Not all NFT will have value, some are just created to cash out in NFT craze.
Since NFT is craze, we never know which NFT get "price tag" due to "craze".

Posted Using LeoFinance Beta

0
0
0.000
avatar

Congratulations @vikisecrets! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You have been a buzzy bee and published a post every day of the week.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think you're right and therein lies the true potential of NFTs: programmatic proof of ownership. I don't know how it could be implemented but to use NFTs for administering usage rights on a piece of audio could massively reduce the complexity and costs compared to how it's done today

It could largely automate the process of licensing works as well

A few weeks ago I got in touch with the agent of the owner of a piece of music: "Spanish Flea" by Herb Alpert... There's a good chance you know the tune even if you don't know the name. I wasn't able to contact the owner directly, but I wanted to discuss a licensing fee for my use of the piece in a video

The agent responded and assumed that what I meant by "use the piece in a video" was "upload said video to YouTube" and told me:

YouTube uses a ContentID software that identifies copyrighted songs. If you upload a non-commercial, personal video to YouTube and the software recognizes it as copyrighted it will notify you. You then need to accept and agree that you do not own the copyright. Once you do that YouTube will monetize the video and pay the copyright holders through ads that will run

Okay, fair enough. I already knew this, but the respondent doesn't know that

If I did decide to post the video to YouTube I would have no choice but to forfeit 100% of the revenue that my production generates

I don't think that's fair. I want to share the revenue with the rightful owner of the piece, not work solely for their benefit. This kind of revenue sharing is done all the time in the world of broadcasting and there's no good reason it can't be done in the context of the Internet

I have yet to respond to the email, so there's a chance it could be worked out if I explain what I'm looking for. There might be a lot of back and forth and then an expectation that I pay thousands of dollars for the right to use the piece, or not. They might be cool...

It would be heaps better if I could just apply for the right to use the work by querying a blockchain, and automatically share a percentage of any revenue my video earns with the owner of the music

That'd be damn cool

0
0
0.000
avatar

Licensing audio in the old economy is a pain in the ass and YouTube does not really solve it but makes it even more unfair, all the revenue goes to the label instead of a fair split or the video is censored.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yep, quite true

I replied to the email, here was the response:

Thanks for clarifying. No, we're not the copyright holders but we are a clearinghouse so you've come to the right place. We'll be happy to help you with this.
You'll need two licenses in order to use this song in your project: a Master-use License and a Synchronization License. The copyright holders are going to request additional information in order to supply a quote. If you could please let me know this info I'll be able to get you some numbers:
Timeline: When is your "drop-dead date" to receive the licenses - this can be an approximation
Budget range: Please be advised that any branded/promotional use will be expensive
Rights: YouTube only? (Will there be any paid media buys or will it be organic posting only or both?)
Territory: Regional - Will it be geo-locked to a specific area?
Term: 6 months? 1 yr?
Description of the spot - alternately, if you have a rough edit that'd be most helpful
Use: ie Full vocal/instrumental - background / Instrumental only - background
Timing: Is this a 30sec or a 15sec spot?
Advertiser: What's the company, product/service
Licensee country: Australia?
It is very helpful to know what your budget range is so I can enter into negotiations effectively. Our fees are included in the final quote to be approved by your team.
We can clear any song in the world so if this one turns out to be over your budget let me know and I'll work on providing possible replacements.

Indeed, a pain in the ass...

0
0
0.000
avatar

Schönes Beispiel dazu:

Der Eminem Beat "Stan's Revenge" wurde in einer Auktion als NFT für 100 000 $ verkauft und Tom MacDonald hat draus einen Song gemacht wo er jetzt draufschreiben kann "produced by Eminem". Das ist ziemlich fett und über Blockchain wäre das richtig gut abbildbar.

0
0
0.000