I know this is old news, but I've been trying to wrap my head around this for two years... On March 11, 2021, Beeple sold an Etherium-based NFT of "Everydays - The First 5,000 Days" for roughly $69 million. But I'm struggling to understand what exactly was and wasn't sold An article on The Verge posted that same day states, "The auction’s winner doesn’t get much: a digital file, mostly, plus some vague rights to present the image."
I understand the NFT Beeple minted is unique and can't be duplicated, but if its correct that the intellectual property rights to the underlying artworks, or even just the collage, were not part of the conveyance in this NFT, then couldn't Beeple just mint additional NFT's for the exact same or similar collages?
Was this NFT, just the digital art equivalent of having a verifiably authentic print of an original artwork, with (at best) an air of assumption that its uniqueness and value will be maintained by the artist choosing not to "print" more copies of it?
This feels like a such an obvious Emperor has no Clothes situation, that I'm wondering, are there any significant errors in my understanding here? Is this typical of NFT's or do the tokens commonly include more significant IP rights to the underlying work?
I noticed some similarity to this question, but it's really just asking about the existince of safeguards against digital forgery, which feels quite a bit different.