Someone help me out a bit here. I realize that for many applications, NFTs depend on subjective value.
Why is an NBA Top Shot highlight clip worth money when someone can watch the same highlight on Youtube for free? It's the exact reason a Mickey Mantle baseball card (picture of Mickey Mantle printed on a small piece of cardstock with stats) is worth money when someone can look at the same picture on Google for free. There's perceived value in being the owner of something that is limited and that a large enough group of people has also determined holds value. If everyone suddenly lost interest (remember Pogs?) then the value would plummet.
I'm struggling a little bit more with NFTs when it comes to digital art. A painting by Picasso is incredibly valuable even though a likeness of the same painting can be purchased from a website like art.com for a low price, then framed and hung on a wall in your house. However, there's a massive physical perceivable difference between the actual Picasso painting vs. a print of the same painting. The painting has brushstrokes, weight, imperfections. The print is a print. The owner of the Picasso painting physically possesses something that no one else in the world can possess, unless possibly you consider a very good forgery. There's a tangible difference.
When someone sells a digital piece of art as an NFT, that digital file could have countless replica files that are physically indistinguishable. I've heard talk of NFT picture frames that would allow someone to display their NFT artwork in their home. If someone else displayed a copy of the same digital artwork file, would they literally be displaying the exact same .jpg image with the only difference being that one person owns a "certificate of authenticity" and one person does not? Although there is more value for the true owner, it seems like the value differential is much lower compared to a physical piece of art.
Moreover, what stops someone like Beeple from later releasing a new NFT of the same piece of art? He just sold "The First 5000 Days" for $69MM. Since anyone can create a new NFT at any time, is there anything that stops Beeple from releasing a new NFT of the same file in a couple of years? Maybe as the buyer of a $69MM piece of digital art you are just taking it in good faith that he won't do that and devalue his entire art collection. However, the owner of "Le Reve" never has to worry about Pablo Picasso painting a second copy of "Le Reve". It's one of a kind and always will be.
Curious what other people think. I'm still trying to sort all of this out and maybe the world doesn't even know these answers yet. I definitely think NFTs have a place in this world, just trying to understand what that will be in the long run.