If you have a digital work of art, an NFT can help you with two things: forms a binding between the rights-holder and the work of art. The NFT can also encode various information and other licensing decisions made by the rights holder for example:

- what is the name of the license covering the work of art - who is the original author - what date was the work created - what if anything was it derived from - are private or public performances allowed - is copying allowed - does the license allow for sublicenses or transfers

And, as we get into the money question: - what is the cost to play, display, or perform this work - who should be paid

I could imagine, say, iTunes being able to play NFT protected works, and being able to collect a fee from the user to be able to play it. In theory this would go directly to the rights holder, which would perhaps be the original author rather than a music publisher.

Another example I saw was that artists could create limited editions, say of 1000 of a digital image. If I wanted to display these on my TV, I would have to have own the NFT. The NFT addresses the problem of how Samsung figures out how to pay the rights holder. Usually after a work of art is sold, the original author is out of the picture. But, they could encode an NFT so that whenever the ownership is transferred, the original creator gets a slice. So, the original creator would continue to benefit from works which appreciate in value.