Kind of make sense. The only value proposition of NFTs is enforcing ownership. Publishing companies along with movie and audio companies are original purveyors if DRM and copyright laws. It’s logical that they will want to take advantage of it. Feels like NFT and blockchain will end up creating a new motivation to steal content again.
I don't even think they can do that. You still need some authority to say "possession of this NFT actually means the person owns this thing". But if you need to have a trusted authority to say that why do you need the blockchain?
> You still need some authority to say "possession of this NFT actually means the person owns this thing"
I.e. a license. "We, X, grant the following permissions to people holding our tokens signed by key <keybytes>: ..." published somewhere believable. (same as e.g. a software license is published on the makers website) The authority to do so is granted by copyright laws.
Tracking who currently holds the relevant tokens is a very different problem, and that's what a blockchain does in this scenario, and NFT proponents argue is better than having some central service that needs to be trusted (but could go away or misbehave) do it, and better than not having an easy way of tracing to the original issuing of the token, which solves the "how do I know you sold a valid instance of this license"/"does this person claiming to do so actually hold a license".
The first part of granting a license is always still boring meat-space law.
