Toggle sidebar

The NHL is launching NFT's... In 2023

Cubs2024wildcard

Cubs2024wildcard

Korchinski for AHL All Star LOL
Apr 29, 2015
8,004
2,554
HockeyVirus said:
nhlbreakaway.com

NHL Breakaway | Officially Licensed Digital Collectibles powered by Sweet

The Official Digital Collectibles Marketplace of the NHL, NHLPA, and NHLAA
nhlbreakaway.com nhlbreakaway.com



The meme of the NHL being several years behind the trends continues.
Click to expand...

These aren't NTF's per say. They're a digital collectable and will make the NHL a boat load of money.

Proper research will let you know that digital collectibles are a big industry. There's plenty of set builders who will pay good money for a digital collectable to complete a set.

There's some Star Wars DC that people will pay thousands of dollars for. The NHL is doing the right thing here not using Fanatics and creating their own brand.

Educate yourself.

CutOnDime97 said:
The Topps Skate app has existed for years. This is just a different flavor of digital collectibles.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

The NHL is smart doing this.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jeremy2020
Prairie Habs

Prairie Habs

Registered User
Oct 3, 2010
12,179
13,226
Romang67 said:
Methods for identifying and certifying ownership over digital objects are cool and imperative in adapting to an increasingly digital world. You can't complain about AI's being trained on data it doesn't own if you have no way to certify ownership of data.

People turned a great idea into animated images of monkeys because they wanted to make a quick buck. And now they are all people think NFT's can be. And, unfortunately, seemingly all they will be for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Authors are complaining (and suing) about ai being trained on their books, how would NFTs change any of that? An NFT doesn't block someone else from seeing it, it just shows ownership. NFT owners complain all the time about people saving images if their NFTs. It makes no sense to say that an author has no way to certify ownership of their books because it's not in an NFT format. It's a published work under their name, everyone knows it's theirs. That's like saying you can't complain about your stuff being stolen when you haven't welded it the floor. The fact it's in your house should be enough that people know they shouldn't take it.

If the owners did stash their NFT books away for no one else to see, that would only make a difference if there were an extremely limited copy of books and the ai people couldn't get their hands on one, which makes no sense for the author. It's also completely ignoring the fact that the owner of an NFT copy of the book shouldn't be the injured party, it's the author who is having their IP stolen.
 
MadLuke

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,482
6,015
Romang67 said:
Methods for identifying and certifying ownership over digital objects are cool and imperative in adapting to an increasingly digital world. You can't complain about AI's being trained on data it doesn't own if you have no way to certify ownership of data.
Click to expand...
But with usual NFT, like those being talked about here, do you own the digital objects of interest or an url toward an usual jpeg simply on the "darkweb", hosted on regular can be lost at any time ?

There are ways to copyrights stuff and anything written is by default copyrighted by its author except if said explicitly otherwise, trained on copyrighted element always well known it is used owned by the author material do its training has it is the default case so I am not sure if NFT could stop them, usually it is trained on stuff where the writer did explicitly give right for the training to occur (wrote it on google doc-mail, facebook, wikipedia, reddit, put the code on github, etc... with term and service that say clearly that training can and will occur on it), that why there is a bit of a buying content war or keeping it for themselve war, stackoverflow, yelp, google search, quora, those are fully owned by the owner of those platform stuff by the term of services.

AI that train on movie scripts, game dialogues, podcast, recent enough books, etc.. anything we can think of that an NFT could be used know very well that it is owned material and will know who own it even because they have read the wikipedia about them.
 
Last edited:
MadLuke

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,482
6,015
BiolaRunner said:
WTF is an NFT?
Click to expand...
Non fungible token, it is a seres of bits that on a non compromised blockchain can be used to show who own that token, it can be interesting if no third party exist that 2 people trust at the same time to establish contract.

Here it seem a bit useless, both party would probably be ok with doing transaction on a nhl owned server.... but if the nhl stop to exist one day maybe (while they probably have to be confident that the server that actually host the thing does not shut down anyway, which is often the case, making the nft part have really limited value)...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
Romang67

Romang67

BitterSwede
Jan 2, 2011
30,453
23,293
Evanston, IL
Prairie Habs said:
Authors are complaining (and suing) about ai being trained on their books, how would NFTs change any of that? An NFT doesn't block someone else from seeing it, it just shows ownership. NFT owners complain all the time about people saving images if their NFTs. It makes no sense to say that an author has no way to certify ownership of their books because it's not in an NFT format. It's a published work under their name, everyone knows it's theirs. That's like saying you can't complain about your stuff being stolen when you haven't welded it the floor. The fact it's in your house should be enough that people know they shouldn't take it.

If the owners did stash their NFT books away for no one else to see, that would only make a difference if there were an extremely limited copy of books and the ai people couldn't get their hands on one, which makes no sense for the author. It's also completely ignoring the fact that the owner of an NFT copy of the book shouldn't be the injured party, it's the author who is having their IP stolen.
Click to expand...
NFT as it currently exists is not the only viable method of certifying digital ownership. Authors are right to be upset about their intellectual property being used for training models without their consent. But until a method exists that can ensure people's right to their own intellectual property online, past lawsuits that may be settled some 5-10 years after the release of the most popular models that used their data, their being upset doesn't solve anything.

We don't have that. And people's instinctive reaction to digital ownership being thinking about copy pasting animated monkey images is not a step in the right direction.
 
MadLuke

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,482
6,015
Romang67 said:
their being upset doesn't solve anything.
Click to expand...
How would Rowling making NFT of her books protect her from having LLM trained on them without her consent ? Specially with the way blockchain tend to work cost wise, the art is not on it, the NFT is only a regular link toward a perfectly regular usual affair if it is of any relevant size.

People make fun of NFT being simple jpeg, they are usually not even that, often they are url toward an simple jpeg on a simple google drive account that will not work when the owner stop to pay for the account.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG, Cas and Prairie Habs

DuckDuckGetz

Registered User
Nov 20, 2017
2,742
4,445
I'm sure there are a lot of legal issues about the players' likeness, so it doesn't surprise me that it takes them forever to do something like this.

But still, that is a lot of time and plenty of opportunity for them to ask "Should we be doing this?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
X