a rival interface could use the same assets for their game.
A feel like a lot of people would stall on this because they'd be stuck thinking it's copyright infringement and also because a lot of people seem to hyperfixate on "it's a jpg you could easily screenshot" and they seem to literally not want to accept anything else (I tried using a fine art analogy with some kids that I thought would know better but they had this idea in their head and they were not letting it go for anything).
That golf analogy was pretty cool though.
unfortunately wouldn't help me or people like me who are clueless with golf and sport in general ^_^;
What I am expecting in the coming years, is that this kind of "opt-in" mentality and freedom of movement is going to become far more important in people's decision making process, especially after a prolonged period of lockdowns and economic hardship
That would be nice.
If you own your assets, there are no copyrights, right? My Byzantine Kitty (fuck that was expensive) is mine, I can burn it if I wish. I actually don't think a rival would be built for Splinterlands (unless something dramatic happened), but there could be a lot of support experiences built leveraging the same assets, that feed back into the game too. Also, "crossover" gaming can be a thing on blockchains, where assets can appear in very unrelated games.
I don't know anything about golf either. The last time I swung a club (that wasn't to break kneecaps) was when I was 13 or so :D
Copyright is hairy XD Like if I drew you a picture of one of my characters, the character is still mine (you still can't pretend that you designed and drew the character all by yourself, nor can you claim that the character is now somehow yours) but the picture (that I very much gave you) is most definitely yours and you could absolutely burn that if you wanted to because it's yours.
well maybe not burn it unless you print it out first because I don't do nfts
If I drew you a picture of a character that I made for you, or I made a character I was intending to give away (an adoptable for example), then you would own both the character and the drawing, and you could burn it if you wanted to XD
I'm reasonably sure both cases are covered but I'm back to knowing the basics as I haven't had to deal with that level of nonsense for a while (do you have any idea how much "fun" it is trying to work around "copyright" issues with fan artists x_x).
I have mentioned in the past (and wrote this whole ass document) that adoptable and breedable artists should absolutely get into nfts but again with the hyperfixation on monkeys and the refusal to understand how they work in favour of how they think they work.
You broke someone's kneecaps with a gold club?! D:
Perhaps it was just a daydream....
Yes, I understand the problems (not in detail like a patent lawyer or whatever) of copyright, but in terms of an NFT asset that I have bought, I own the card, "the hash" for that particular version and I can prove that that particular version is mine, with the key etc. I don't own the artwork on it, I own the print of it and as such, I can use that print as I choose (which probably has limitations too).
What is also going to be interesting is, that even though I own the location, that can also be ported into another location in a fork, so is it still the same asset?
I'd say a simplistically and technically tentative yes IFF it poofs from one location to the other so it continues only existing in one location. There might be problems all around if you can spawn a second copy by forking (like what happened with the content when hive forked off).