No matter how hard you blockchain you're still under the law of the government. You still have to pay taxes in your country's currency. Your "decentralized" blockchain still relies on centralization. Your internet infrastructure is centralized and ran usually by the government. The power grid you depend on is centralized.
My point is your blockchain technology still relies on the government. China even outlawed Bitcoin mining. YOU ARE NOT GOING TO FIX POLITICAL PROBLEMS WITH BLOCKCHAIN.
They knew that when it was created that States would crush it like they had crushed other attempt. With Bitcoin, they could not. I don't think its safe to say its under the law. The law is to the side. Bitcoin exists in a numerical and computation universe that cares not for the laws of man.
No one other than extremists (which exist in all groups) believe this, using this as a reason to hate NFTs makes you appear unreasonable and not grounded in reality
This is the main argument I hear. Tell me then, how else is it useful?
> using this as a reason to hate NFTs makes you appear unreasonable and not grounded in reality
It's a perfectly valid reason to hate NFTs among so many others. Instead of since centralized authority such as a government keeping track of who owns something it's a "decentralized" blockchain.
To claim it has no benefits other than decentralization seems odd to me
Edit: I can't respond past this point as I'm being throttled
I’d argue that what you’ve stated is just the mechanism by which decentralisation is achieved (you haven’t identified any additional benefits).
Still, legally speaking, who is exactly enforcing it? Opensea? MPAA? I get that is going to be a fun question to answer since you can technically sue for anything ( but its not a guarantee that a judge will throw it out if he/she sees something sufficiently in the 'wasting my time' category ).
No. Authenticity of the data is not part of the concept.
What would that even mean in the context of non-physical contracts? You can buy an experience as an NFT (i.e. dinner with a C-list celeb) and the NFT serves as nothing more than a receipt saying you purchased that experience. Doesn't have to be unique (several people could by the same), doesn't include any specific metadata relating to the buyer.
What kind of "cryptographic authenticity" would even apply in such case?
It gets worse with digital assets if all you get is an IPFS URI. The actual data can be removed or altered at any point without the NFT itself being affected in way. Unless the asset itself is stored in the blockchain (which is practically impossible for anything beyond thumbnail-sized images) there's nothing to validate on the BC besides the token itself.