Human beings might be the smartest species to ever walk the earth, but it hasn’t really kept them from making a mistake every now and then. This dynamic has already been reinforced quite a few times throughout our history, with each testimony forcing us to look for some semblance of a defensive cover. We will, however, find that cover only when we bring dedicated regulatory bodies into the fold. Having a well-defined authority across all areas was a game-changer, as it instantly gave us a cushion against many of our errors. However, the utopia that emerged from it will soon dissipate into thin air, and if we are being honest, it was all technology’s fault. Technology deserves the stick here mainly because of its layered nature, which awarded people a chance to exploit others for their own benefit. In case this wasn’t devastating enough, the whole runner was soon materializing on such a big scale that it expectantly overwhelmed our governing forces, therefore sending them back to the square one. Nevertheless, after much time in the wilderness, the regulatory industry is now looking finally looking set to make a comeback. The traces of it have, in fact, turned more and more evident over the recent past, and Andreessen Horowitz’s latest move should only solidify this shift even further.
Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) has officially introduced “Can’t Be Evil” licenses, which are, at heart, a series of agreements that let creators grant non-fungible token owners partial or near-complete rights to their NFT art. According to certain reports, the licenses are based on the Creative Commons (CC) copyright framework, barring a major exception. Whereas Creative Commons give blanket licenses to people, a16z’s licenses focus on the relationship between an NFT buyer and the person who created the original art. Talk about what licenses are included in the newly-launched mix, we start with the “CC0 agreement” that lets anybody remix or redistribute a piece of art. Next up, we have “Exclusive Commercial Rights” to give the buyer an exclusive right to use their purchased art as they deem fit. This is followed by “Non-Exclusive Commercial Rights” that sits along a somewhat similar line, but here, the NFT creator also has the right use the art. Apart from them, we have dedicated licenses for ‘Personal Use’. Like the name suggests, these iterations will allow you to copy and display the relevant art, but you won’t be able to use it commercially.
These licenses are also open to sublicensing; therefore letting NFT owners authorize other people to use their art. However, in case the owner ends up selling the asset, any sublicensing agreement will be immediately terminated.
a16z even goes on to take an intriguing approach towards events like NFT theft and other related scenarios. The contract put-together by the company talks to how copyrights only transfer if the NFT is legally sold, basically implying that stealing somebody’s token will not give you all the rights which are usually packaged with it.
GRC pic credits: Reuters