One of the most attractive selling points for some NFT The ability to make and sell derivative artworks, merchandise and other products using their avatars is one of the benefits of these projects. But a new report from Galaxy Digital suggests that major NFT projects have “misled” buyers about what they’re getting when it comes to supposed IP rights.
This publication was released Friday “A Survey of NFT Licenses: Facts & Fictions” The report examines NFT projects with the highest implied market value. Particular attention is paid to the rights they claim to grant their owners. The report concludes that, in fact, the “vast majority of NFTs convey zero intellectual property ownership” to their owners—and it highlights two projects in particular that Galaxy researchers believe have falsely marketed IP rights to buyers: The Bored Ape Yacht Club & Moonbirds.
According to the report, some NFT projects are more permissive with IP than others. Yuga Labs’ Bored Apes are Perhaps the most well-known example of a project that allows holders broad licenses to use their rights is Ethereum Images from NFT can be modified as the user sees fit. This has resulted in apparel. marijuana packaging, music projectsAnd even more Fast food restaurants with a savoury theme.
As CryptoPunks NFT Owners Get Commercial Rights, Yuga Hopes to Secure Their ‘Legacy as Artwork’
Other projects may also hinder commercialization. DoodlesThe report states that this limits the revenue potential for derivative works and restricts the ability of the original artist to be modified. Meanwhile, Gary Vaynerchuk’s VeeFriends project has a very limited “personal use only” license that doesn’t allow for user-made commercial products.
Projects that are open-source can also be found. Creative Commons Zero (CC0) “no rights reserved” approach, letting anyone and everyone use the artwork to create derivative projects—not just NFT holders. Nouns is undoubtedly the most popular. The best-known example isWhile Moonbirds Is about to Switch to this type of license.
However, even when an NFT project offers broad commercialization rights, Galaxy Digital’s report claims that the language can be muddled or contradictory, or outright false. Alex Thorn, chief of Galaxy Digital Research, said Decrypt that there’s often “a discrepancy between what the public thinks they’re buying and what they’re really buying” with such NFTs.
An NFT Is a blockchain a cryptocurrency? token That is an indication that you are the owner of an item. The Bored Ape Yacht Club has profile picture collections. CryptoPunks are two examples of these popular examples.
For example, take the Bored Ape Yacht Club. Yuga Labs’ license says that “when you purchase an NFT, you own the underlying Bored Ape, the Art, completely.” However, Yuga Labs is still the copyright holder that owns the intellectual property, and as such, Galaxy Digital writes that Yuga “implicitly acknowledges that the NFT holder does not, in fact, own the art.”
This week, earlierYuga Labs published much longer and more extensive IP licensing deals. CryptoPunks And MeebitsIt is a pair of highly-respected NFT projects. Purchased earlier in the year. Those agreements offer more clarity on NFT holders’ rights, but Yuga Labs’ Noah Davis Telled Decrypt Last week that the Bored Ape license won’t be updated to match those licenses.
Decrypt Yuga Labs did not respond to our request for comment on the Galaxy Digital Report and the criticisms made of its Bored Ape Yacht Club license agreement.
Why Ethereum NFT Creators Are Giving Away Commercial Rights—To Everyone
Moonbirds is being criticised in the report as a result of its behaviour. Recently-announced plan to embrace a CC0 license. Tech entrepreneur Kevin Rose’s Web3 The startup Proof launched the project earlier in the year. wrote on the Moonbirds site that “You own the IP” when you buy a Moonbirds NFT. Proof claimed that it would put Moonbirds in the public domain, despite this claim.
“The fact that Proof can unilaterally change the terms of its license, and did so, is further proof that Moonbirds NFT holders did not, in fact, ‘own the IP,’” the report reads.
Thorn described the situation as follows: Decrypt as a “more egregious case of discrepancy between marketing materials and the stated licenses” than something like the Bored Ape Yacht Club. Many Moonbirds owners have expressed anger over the decision, with one claiming that a planned “six-figure licensing deal” with a brand After the CC0 announcement, it fell apart.
FYI, shortly after the @moonbirds CC0 announcement, I actually lost a 6 figure licensing deal that I’d been working on for a while.
I understand the decision, but the approach by the team could’ve been much better.
Upwards & Onwards
We will see you all at Parliament today!
— Lakoz.eth (🦍 ,🦉) (@Lakoz_) August 5, 2022
The proof did not respond immediately Decrypt’s Request for Comment Galaxy Digital report.
According to the report, only one of the 25 largest projects by market capitalization attempted to grant IP rights to holders. World of Women. It states that World of Women has the most thoughtful licensing agreement that attempts to overcome the shortcomings of others on the list—but it too has issues, particularly in regards to how rights transfer after secondary market sales.
“Essentially, no NFT projects are successfully transferring IP rights,” Thorn told Decrypt. “It poses a huge problem for the future of the meta and also dramatically undermines that proposed dream of Web3, which is user-owned digital property rights on this future version of the internet,” he said.
Why? By and large, Thorn suggested, it’s because the NFT space is still nascent, and such commercialization rights initiatives only gained momentum last year. Some of these licensing agreements appear “amateurish,” he said, and many projects simply take cues from one another. The licensing terms for NFT are becoming more detailed as time passes.
“The Bored Ape Yacht Club is a good example, because as they got bigger and bigger and they Their metaverse was created, these agreements have gotten clearer and clearer and more professional,” Thorn told Decrypt.
Galaxy Digital’s report ultimately concludes that NFT owners need to fight for clarity on IP rights, and that it’s up to project creators to find ways to embrace true Web3 ownership, rather than just assigning a license. Otherwise, it suggests, “the NFT landscape will evidently formulate into Web2 products that are marketed and disguised as Web3 products.”