NFTs Weren’t Supposed to End Like This

Anil Dash, CEO of Glitch

By Anil Dash

When we invented non-fungible tokens, we were trying to protect artists. But tech-world opportunism has struck again.

The only thing we’d wanted to do was ensure that artists could make some money and have control over their work. Back in May 2014, I was paired up with the artist Kevin McCoy at Seven on Seven, an annual event in New York City designed to spark new ideas by connecting technologists and artists. I wasn’t sure which one I was supposed to be; McCoy and his wife, Jennifer, were already renowned for their collaborative digital art, and he was better at coding than I was.

At the time, I was working as a consultant to auction houses and media companies—a role that had me obsessively thinking about the provenance, ownership, distribution, and control of artworks. Seven on Seven was modeled after tech-industry hackathons, in which people stay up all night to create a working prototype that they then show to an audience. This was around the peak of Tumblr culture, when a raucous, wildly inspiring community of millions of artists and fans was sharing images and videos completely devoid of attribution, compensation, or context. As it turned out, some of the McCoys’ works were among those being widely “reblogged” by Tumblr users. And Kevin had been thinking a lot about the potential of the then-nascent blockchain—essentially an indelible ledger of digital transactions—to offer artists a way to support and protect their creations.

By the wee hours of the night, McCoy and I had hacked together a first version of a blockchain-backed means of asserting ownership over an original digital work. Exhausted and a little loopy, we gave our creation an ironic name: monetized graphics. Our first live demonstration was at the New Museum of Contemporary Art in New York City, where the mere phrase monetized graphics prompted knowing laughter from an audience wary of corporate-sounding intrusions into the creative arts. McCoy used a blockchain called Namecoin to register a video clip that his wife had previously made, and I bought it with the four bucks in my wallet.

Owner: Kevin McCoy
Kevin McCoy
b. 1967
Non-fungible token ERC-721
Token ID: 0
9 mb Tif + file archive with documentation
Originally minted on May 3, 2014 on Namecoin blockchain, and preserved on a token minted on May 28, 2021 by the artist
Calls to for supporting documentation
Smart Contract Address: 0xe81a45439ff9bc5841202ce4b2049e578f8771d9
Lot sold: 1,472,000 USD
Read more @ Sotheby’s

Read this entire article @ The Atlantic

Can you really trust NFTs?

Originally published by Yahoo! finance

Speculative crypto art market takes off
Felix Salmon
February 25, 2021·
Yahoo! finance

One fake Banksy, by an artist calling themselves Pest Supply, sold for more than 60 ETH, or about $100,000. The artwork featured a stencil saying “I can’t believe you morons actually buy this NFT shit.” It’s not clear where or how the buyer could resell the work, given that the Opensea platform has now disabled all future sales by that artist.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s