Palmer, the California artist, says sometimes he gets dozens of alerts a day from DeviantArt that his work is being sold without his permission on OpenSea.Last year, he successfully petitioned OpenSea by email to take down some auctions of his work.But, in recent weeks the platform has been requiring artists submit a Digital Millennium Copyright request, the formal legal mechanism for copyright owners to ask that their work be taken off a hosting platform, Palmer said.”I’ve given up submitting these requests, it’s just too time consuming,” he said.Artists like Palmer want platforms like OpenSea, which was recently valued at $13 billion, to invest more in proactively ensuring artists’ work isn’t ripped off.Some have given up petitioning OpenSea and have started submitting their complaints directly to Google, which hosts the images on OpenSea’s auctions.The OpenSea spokesperson said in a statement that the company is scaling its efforts “across customer support, trust and safety, and site integrity so we can move faster to protect and empower our community and creators.”James Grimmelmann, a professor of digital law at Cornell Law School, said as long as the NFT platforms are responding to complaints from copyright holders, they are operating within the law – even if scammers are running rampant.Grimmelmann said NFT marketplaces are facing the same thorny issue that the older generation of internet platforms is still grappling with: how to fairly moderate online content at a massive scale.”NFTs don’t solve this problem,” he said. “These platforms are just the latest to discover how hard that really is.”
As the NFT market explodes into a $25 billion industry, artists worry that lax oversight is leading to a digital art world flooded with fakes.
The CryptoArt market is a new way for artists to distribute digital works to collectors: often digital images and video files. The blockchain technology provides secure ownership, traceability, artist commission on second market sales and a thriving market place, with platforms emerging quickly: Nifty Gateway, SuperRare, MakersPlace.. It’s a vibrant and welcoming community, a place to discuss the works with collectors, and it brings a lot of benefits that the Art market fails to provide.With no travel involved, and a mostly digital distribution, this new model looks like it has the potential to become a sustainable practice for artists. That’s until you understand the magnitude of the environmental impacts of the current blockchain: It is a DISAST
NFTs  are not just cat pictures that people trade on blockchains. Today digital art , collectibles , and in-game assets  are the most visible use cases for these nifty non-fungibles. But the market holds an inconspicuous secret: there is a staggering diversity of online digital content that can be placed on a blockchain in the form of NFTs.
The goal of Quality Magnet Coin QMC for short, is to build a large torrent magnet index that’s impossible to take offline, censor, or block.
The core idea is fairly straightforward. The application uses the blockchain to create a decentralized database of torrent magnet links which doesn’t rely on a hosting service or domain name, making it virtually impossible to take down
De muziekindustrie staat bekend als een harde wereld. Het is niet vanzelfsprekend dat je je brood kunt verdienen met muziek maken en helemaal niet voor jonge artiesten. De industrie wordt gekenmerkt door haar ingewikkelde, bureaucratische structuur. Een structuur waarin artiesten maanden moeten wachten op uitbetaling van royalty’s, waarin complexe contracten onvermijdelijk lijken en transparantie niet lijkt te bestaan. Dat moet toch anders? Volgens de initiatiefnemers van IBT Music kan dat. Teun van Eil, projectleider van het initiatief, legt uit hoe hun geautomatiseerde blockchain-systeem het verschil kan maken en transparantie brengt in de muziekindustrie.
It was just an idea posted in a random financial forum, but people saw the implications immediately. The Bitcoin-BCH financial network brings with it an uncensorable Twitter-like microblogging, called
Memo . Once somebody realized this can also be used for magnet links …
In a global economic landscape of hyper-commodification and financialisation, efforts to assimilate digital art into the high-stakes commercial art market have so far been rather unsuccessful, presumably because digital artworks cannot easily assume the status of precious object worthy of collection. This essay explores the use of blockchain technologies in attempts to create proprietary digital art markets in which uncommodifiable digital artworks are financialised as artificially scarce commodities. Using the decentralisation techniques and distributed database protocols underlying current cryptocurrency technologies, such efforts, exemplified here by the platform Monegraph, tend to be presented as concerns with the interest of digital artists and with shifting ontologies of the contemporary work of art. I challenge this characterisation, and argue, in a discussion that combines aesthetic theory, legal and philosophical theories of intellectual property, rhetorical analysis and research in the political economy of new media, that the formation of proprietary digital art markets by emerging commercial platforms such as Monegraph constitutes a worrisome amplification of long-established, on-going efforts to fence in creative expression as private property. As I argue, the combination of blockchain-based protocols with established ambitions of intellectual property policy yields hybrid conceptual-computational financial technologies (such as self-enforcing smart contracts attached to digital artefacts) that are unlikely to empower artists but which serve to financialise digital creative practices as a whole, curtailing the critical potential of the digital as an inherently dynamic and potentially uncommodifiable mode of production and artistic expression.
Our CPDP 2018 blockchain and copyright panel with Ruslan Nurullaev (International Laboratory for Information Technology and Intellectual Property Law, Higher School of Economics), Primavera De Filippi (CNRS), Susana Nascimento (Joint Research Centre, European Commission), Guido Noto La Diega (Northumbria University), and Alexander Savelyev (Higher School of Economics) is online.
My slides are here:
On the 26 October 2017, the EUIPO brought together around 80 people to interact and discuss the implication of Blockchain technology on the world of intellectual property. Participants includes Blockchain experts, national IP offices, right holder representatives and representatives from civil society. The conference convered the basic concepts of the technology, the many aspects of interaction between the technology and intellectual property, 3 practical use cases and a look into the future.