NFTs vs. DRM – A Discussion w/ Jonathan Caras
How are NFTs better than existing DRM programs when it comes to unlocking life-long access to art and exclusive rewards?
Jonathan Caras of Lionschain Capital (who btw has an awesome project looming) broke it down pretty clearly.
DRM= You Can Never Own This
NFT= You Will Always Own This
“DRM means digital rights management. Which came out in the 90s. It’s where you purchase the temporary rights to a digital asset, a music file, a movie etc. and the service provider gives you a revocable key that can unlock the content for yourself but prevents you from duplicating it or transferring it.
“DRM is the opposite of self custody. You never really own an asset with DRM. The company always has control and if they go bust then all of your purchases can be lost.”
NFTs are the polar opposite of this. The only overlap NFTs have with DRM is they both enable limited supply assets. One via a centralized service which is not independently verifiable and can be adjusted by the company at will.
Still, the NFT asset is the token. You’re not owning the actual art. “It’s a JSON file with a history of what wallet minted it and who owned it previously,” continues Jonathan. “It’s metadata associated with the token.
“Imagine I had a photo of Adam West. And you had an identical photo of Adam West but it was signed by him. “One would be worth a decent sum of money and one would not. We can all print more photos of Batman. The image isn’t the value.”
“Why is a signature in pen and paper more valuable than a signature on a public ledger written in cryptography? The signature on a public ledger has. many advantages. It can be displayed anywhere in the world. It’s impossible to fake. It can’t decay. It can be incorporated into other digital environments.
Jonathan was then told, “In the case of a signed image, it’s not about the ink on paper. It’s about the idea that Adam West acknowledged you, that he held this actual paper in his actual hands. It’s not about the signature. This is not something that can be digitized without losing much/most of the value.”
To which the reply was, “Isn’t that subjective to the market? If I buy Adam West’s signature on eBay, he never acknowledged me and I can’t verify its authenticity. And I can’t show it off. An NFT from Adam West is far more useful. If the market prefers an Adam West NFT do you really have grounds to stand on that it’s inferior? DRM is designed to prevent self custody.”
Let us know what YOU think in the comments!