'Hungry' performance artist, David Datuna, eats $120k banana art installation

This has some interesting legal implications. It seems the art piece requires the banana to be replaced regularly. Yet it still fetched 120k. So what was actually sold here? The duct tape certainly has to be renewed as well, so it's the nail in the wall? He didn't eat the nail.

But he still might face the consequence of having to pay the 120k. (Not really, it seems no-one is going to press charges.) Just the idea that there could potentially be a legal claim here though, is interesting. Usually we think it's the physical artpiece that is of monetary value, but what if it could be sucessfully applied to the idea or performance of art as well in court?