Galaxy Digital, a blockchain leadership company, released a report which says that most of the profitable NFT projects are misleading and offer complicated ownership licenses. According to Galaxy Digital, digital asset creators and purchasers are clueless about the ownership of digital tokens, which is why people are unaware of their intellectual property rights.
The blockchain company discovers that only one of the total 25 NFT projects strives to offer purchasers direct IP rights to the principal art or content. The major NFT projects that the company researched included, Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), which is a collection of ten thousand Ethereum-based NFTs, another NFT project World of Women, Gary Vaynerchuk’s VeeFriends, Sandbox, and lastly Decentraland. Both Sandbox and Decentraland are metaverse community platforms.
The deep analysis of these big projects revealed that the lion’s share of non-fungible tokens carries zero copyright of their actual content. Numerous operators seem to deceive NFT buyers about their basic legal rights. In addition, a few NFT projects have undertaken Creative Commons licenses to avoid confusion. Here Creative Commons license is the public copyright license that allows the distribution of work free of charge. This is a legal authority given to the other people by the creator to share or utilize the art of one’s own free will. Coming back to the point, only a handful of projects have adopted CC license, and some have adequately unleashed intellectual property rights from the NFT, thus making it inconvenient for token holders to uphold special privileges to the art.
That said, it reflects the critical points of a review shared by Cornell University that Bored Apes being the most extensive and impactful blockchain series is precisely unclear. In contrast, BAYC offers buyers the right of ownership of NFTs but, on the flip side, provides a skeptical license. Simply put, if you create something, you wouldn’t require a permit to utilize it.
Nevertheless, Yuga Labs, a blockchain company that creates digital collectibles, has begun to inculcate terms of service for its NFT series to offer a personalized experience of NFT licensing. Furthermore, the World of Women (WoW) also practices copyright ownership of art with its digital tokens. However, WoW does not explain how selling NFTs convey rights to others. It is essential to mention here that when intellectual property rights are associated with NFT creators, they can change the terms according to their preference which is sometimes unsuitable for purchasers.
The last Galaxy Digital review emphasizes the NFT copyrights particularly. This would help those who want to legalize their NFT purchases. But right now, it does not seem to deal with IP rights.
Illustration: Pikisuperstar/Freepik
Read next: Adobe Reveals Content Creators Are Increasing At A Steady Pace, And Influencers Are Earning Hefty Amounts In The Process
The blockchain company discovers that only one of the total 25 NFT projects strives to offer purchasers direct IP rights to the principal art or content. The major NFT projects that the company researched included, Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC), which is a collection of ten thousand Ethereum-based NFTs, another NFT project World of Women, Gary Vaynerchuk’s VeeFriends, Sandbox, and lastly Decentraland. Both Sandbox and Decentraland are metaverse community platforms.
The deep analysis of these big projects revealed that the lion’s share of non-fungible tokens carries zero copyright of their actual content. Numerous operators seem to deceive NFT buyers about their basic legal rights. In addition, a few NFT projects have undertaken Creative Commons licenses to avoid confusion. Here Creative Commons license is the public copyright license that allows the distribution of work free of charge. This is a legal authority given to the other people by the creator to share or utilize the art of one’s own free will. Coming back to the point, only a handful of projects have adopted CC license, and some have adequately unleashed intellectual property rights from the NFT, thus making it inconvenient for token holders to uphold special privileges to the art.
That said, it reflects the critical points of a review shared by Cornell University that Bored Apes being the most extensive and impactful blockchain series is precisely unclear. In contrast, BAYC offers buyers the right of ownership of NFTs but, on the flip side, provides a skeptical license. Simply put, if you create something, you wouldn’t require a permit to utilize it.
Nevertheless, Yuga Labs, a blockchain company that creates digital collectibles, has begun to inculcate terms of service for its NFT series to offer a personalized experience of NFT licensing. Furthermore, the World of Women (WoW) also practices copyright ownership of art with its digital tokens. However, WoW does not explain how selling NFTs convey rights to others. It is essential to mention here that when intellectual property rights are associated with NFT creators, they can change the terms according to their preference which is sometimes unsuitable for purchasers.
The last Galaxy Digital review emphasizes the NFT copyrights particularly. This would help those who want to legalize their NFT purchases. But right now, it does not seem to deal with IP rights.
Read next: Adobe Reveals Content Creators Are Increasing At A Steady Pace, And Influencers Are Earning Hefty Amounts In The Process
