"I'm gonna kick the door in" "I got some top men" These people really live in a fantasy world. They're imaginary tough guys kicking in doors with their imaginary goon squad, going after imaginary property
You have to pity him. He cannot say "I will hunt you, kick your door and kick your ass", because is Seth Green, a Chihuahua with a hyperactive bladder is far more intimidating
Dude I'm 24 and still have no idea why NFTs are so popular.Unless its money laundering like watches and art.Who tf is actually buying this shit? Mfs are creating their own demand and supply outta thin air 😭.
@@Chin-ny4kj It's a lot of money from middle-high class people between 20 and 50 years old, who see the economy stagnating, not being able to do what the boomers promised was possible (e.g. buy a house, keep a marriage), and jump into this crazy shit. They always existed, as well as Ponzi/Pyramid schemes, but now they get more reach with social media and higher retention with tech jargon. It all gets amplified by the minority making big bank hyping it up even more, while the majority losing money (because it's a zero sum game, the dollars anyone earns come from those who lost money) just stay silent. All of that is supported by extremely rich people using a small portion of their money to keep the whole thing afloat because they love the prospect of getting even more money from those poorer than them. In short, they are losers from the 5%, like there have been in every generation, that become desperate enough to jump into these insane promises, plus grifters from the 1% siphoning even more money from them.
I haven't watched it yet, but I'm guessing he gave it away through social engineering or some other tactic. Not like it matters, it's a jpg of an ape anyways.
not even a jpeg, its a hyperlink to a set of code that describes a thing made by a bot which resides on a "decentralized" platform... yeah that might complicate things even further.
What's ironic about this is if he alters the design of the ape just slightly then it's a different IP (especially when considering how the NFTs are generated) and the show can continue. The reason he'd want it to be his ape is so that the show can inflate the value of his NFT.
it is possible they know this and the entire theft is just advertising. Then he can say heworked it out with the creators of the bored apes to make it anyway.
Exactly. A lotta yall still dont get it. ape holders can use multiple slurp juices on a single ape. so if you have 1 astro ape and 3 slurp juices you can create 3 new apes.
@@FatFrogChonk The difference is that in real world there's a law to protect someone's property. And those law have actual power. Also the stolen stuff can be retrieved.
That's basically how the real world works, good luck getting stolen goods back unless you put a digital tracker in it or something. Most stolen goods in real life are never returned, it's too hard to prove they were genuinely stolen without identifiers.
The entire point of the crypto/NFT world was to have things whose existence was independent of laws or banks. Viva la libertarianism! Up with anarchy! Then when stuff like this happens they cry that governments can't do anything to enforce their ownership. But they made it that way! On purpose!
I hope the writers of Family Guy make a “Chris Becomes Obsessed with NFTs” episode so they can force Seth Green to make fun of himself. Kinda like how they poke fun at his involvement in Robot Chicken.
I think this is a great example as to why the blockchain is a terrible place to store your property rights. Either the blockchain means nothing or you have no recourse to theft.
I don't understand this drama at all. What is keeping Seth from just making his show anyway? In what court is the "true" owner of the ape possibly going to sue him? All this business about "owning" NFTs is just larping, it has no actual legal standing, does it?
The true owner isn't the hacker, it's someone who bought it from the hacker. If the show makes enough money, I'd imagine that the person who has the property rights would sue to get a cut.
Making a show where you don’t have commercial use rights to the main character is always going to be a risky decision. The new owner is not the scammer either, it’s a secondary market purchaser from the scammer-Darkwing.
The original sale contract states that you get the copyright when you buy an ape. However, if I understood correctly what Legal Eagle had to say about situations like these, the contract doesn't apply to any subsequent transfer of the token unless a new one was signed
So let me get this straight. Seth had a whole production based off this ape and he decided to keep it in a hot wallet instead of secure in a Ledger? I think it's more plausible that they knew the show was a stinker and made this whole story up.
I don't think he made it up. I think he got scammed. But he has to play it off like it's not THAT big a deal because he's a celebrity and there's the whole production around it. He can't just go to the corner and cry. Not in public anyway.
I've worked in film and TV and thought about the people who are actually behind making this show. Have they lost their jobs because rights to an imaginary cartoon ape was stolen? Life in that industry was turbulent enough already. Yeah, let's introduce NFTs. That'll make it all better...
I wonder if the show production was behind schedule and this theft is just a convenient ploy to get more time. If the NFT is miraculously returned that would strengthen my suspicion
The rights to an imaginary cartoon ape, the rights to a talking big mouse, the rights to space wizards with light swords. By that logic there's no copyright infringement to anyone making a new star wars movie. Which is something I support tbh
@@eduardobranco8349 except ppl drew that talking mouse. Lucas wrote and did in some cases draw that star wars IP......alot of these NFTs are generated by machines. And according to US court rulings, they therefore are not able to be copyrighted or trademarked unless substantial human influence is involved in the project.
Seth could have just drawn his own bored ape and given it a copyright, it would been safer and slightly less stupid. There is little real world advantage to an NFT.
If he attached the rights to the nft itself it wouldn't be any less of an issue, if it is separate from the nft there wouldn't really be any point to the nft itself.
One of the most interesting things about NFT copyrights is that most likely they are not enforceable. US courts ruled that a copyright *HAS* to be created by a person. Most of these "Copyrights" are on computer generated images, which do not have enforceable copyright.
Lol I don't even know what they're expecting from this clusterfuck since none of the involved actually made the Bored Ape art. If anything I'm pretty sure only the artist(s) have any leg to stand on in the copyright department.
They're also stuck between rock and hard because if they just went ahead with the show and someone made a copyright claim, went to court, and the court set a precedent that NFT's aren't actual copyright then the whole NFT world would crash instantly.
This "future" is simply no different than the age of bandits in the Medieval Era where you had no recourse if your property was stolen by another group. Except get a well-armed bigger group to get it back & teach the other guys a permanent lesson...
The funniest thing is though, he couldn't even legally put out the show because the NFT background COLOR matters, which, in animation, you can't do unless he's always against a blank backdrop. If he's not, he is using someone elses board ape with the exact same clothes facial expression. And that isn't even touching on the fact that if the ape starts talking, it's even MORE at risk of reproducing a still frame of someone else's ape of wearing the same clothes with a different expression. It's hilarious how bad this is knowing the background color on the NFT matters. I forgot who pointed this out to me but god it was funny.
@@TimmehJay Exactly, legally this couldn't even exist without stepping on someone elses toes. This was a problem upon conception EVEN BEFORE the theft. If anything, the theft of this asset did the guy a favor.
@@epiccollision @AureaPersona Both of you are right. I forgot about that court case. But it does draw into question what rights are the parent company even offering then??? Cause they claim to be offering commercial rights. . . so how does that work???
Idk why this seems like a marketing ploy as I never heard about this project until after his NFT got "stolen" I may be wrong but nowadays I feel like this would be the type of stuff they would do to hype something.
The whole Nee Eff Tee celeb thing has really shined a light on so many "relatable" celebs on social media...in that they aren't. It was all there just to get fans to like them and buy their stuff, and the fact most of them have doubled down on their apes or whatever has just shown how little they think of their fans. Also Seth has made some good stuff, but that show looks so devoid of any effort it's painful to watch.
@@kevadu huh, strange. slight interest goes down over 2 weeks because of $LUNA bank run crashing the market and that means it's "tanking" entirely. nope. not how that works. nfts are still around, new projects & artworks constantly coming out. as i said, even if interest decreases, they're not going away.
@@DragoNate I didn't say a word about Luna. Stop creating strawmen to argue with... NFT trade volume is down like 90% since it's peak late last year. Google search interest in NFTs is about a quarter what it was in January. These are long-running trends that have absolutely nothing to do with the more recent Luna nonsense but I suppose the constant news about scams and disasters in the crypto space doesn't exactly help either.
And this is why my parents always said "Get a Receipt!" and "Get it in writing!" ...when something is vague, unprovable, or in this case, exists only I an intangible, digital form...anything can happen!
So satisfyingly hilarious to me that this happened in a convention basically designed to promote NFTs. Celebrating the commodification of art on the internet through a TV show is dystopian to me so I love that this happened.
NFTs and crypto in general seem to be so risky and volatile. It just seems like making a show with an NFT just seemed to be a questionable idea at best.
@@BBWahoo Absolutely. A lotta guys love to give tax breaks to these folks and companies while letting us die. Doesn't change that fact that the rich are leeches
The thing that makes this hilarious is that it is unbelievably stupid that he didn't stash the Ape in a freaking offline hardware wallet. It is so stupid that he wouldn't do that.
Not only that he would've literally had to click on a link and sign a transaction to approve somebody taking it. You have to be a different kind of stupid to do that on its own. Let alone using a wallet with a bored ape in it 😂
@@DailyMynt depends what you mean by "wallet". Are you referring wallet to the node on the blockchain or the wallet that holds the keys? There is a problem with the terminology.
He (and anyone else) might still be able to use the NFT... Legal Eagle did a video about NFTs and pointed out that an NFT created by a Computer randomly putting parts together might not have a copyright because it wasn't created by a human. I can't remember the details, and it's probably not something you'd want to go to court over, but it was interesting.
@@Tommmmmmmmmmmm From how proud these guys are of their nfts. It legit doesn't matter how easy it is to make an identical picture. He's doing this to generate value so he can sell the nft later on. Nft people won't buy a duplicate of that picture. It's not the one that exact one that Seth made a show with. So it's worthless. If he makes a show with a different one nft people will simply not want it as much and Seth doesn't make as much money
@@Tommmmmmmmmmmm I'm not a lawyer, but I'm confident that changing a single pixel in an image would not give you a copyright to the "new" image. That would be like removing a single frame from 'Avengers End Game' and that giving you a copyright to the "new" version. The point of my comment is that there's a good chance that nobody owns the copyright to the image because it was generated by a computer so, it might not meet the requirements to have a copyright in the first place.
If there's no copyright on the ape then anyone could make a show or merch using the ape regardless of who owns the NFT, so Seth could make his show. No need to waste time minting a new ape.
This is kind of the main issue with NFT’s. Possession is apparently all the law and Seth Green cannot “somehow” Legally prove ownership despite being able to prove purchase of it?
I came here to learn how to invest after listening to a guy on radio talk about the importance of investing and how he made $960,000 in 4 months from $160k, somehow this video has helped shed light on some things, but I'm still confused, I'm a newbie and I'm open to ideas.
@Dwayne Wright That's impressive. Are you giving her your money or the money stays in your trading account? What's really the idea behind copying trades.
The point is not to be good, the point is to reinforce in-group mentality. It is not about advertising your product to someone else, but to say to members of your own group that "look at what we did, imagine the thing we can do, so hold onto your NFTs". In fact, criticism is welcomed because that only reinforce even more: look at all these snobbish critics who don't get it, remember that they are our enemies, and don't listen to whatever the enemies say, regardless of logic.
How would this stop the series? If Seth gets sued the "owner" of the nft will have to identify themselves. And then they will have to answer in a real court why they are buying stolen "goods"and refusing to return it when the original other contacts them
Hahahaha, the burden of a decentralised network... You can't track down the accounts involved in the fraud at all. This stuff is definitely the future, guys!
I used to really love Seth Green but this makes me judge him heavily especially since he's buddies with Gary Vee. So basically his NFT was taken by someone who pretty much exploited the biggest loophole flaw of them and Seth still can't see how awful they are?
If he used the image anyway, would that not force the person that stole it have to come forward to defend their new ownership, thus revealing who they are?
@@HHmz-rp8ht the fact it's not regulated yet probably isn't something he's privy to, and he's just going along with "person who owns this owns the IP" because that's what's being told to him by the crypto bros. If that makes sense? I wouldn't say it's a lie to get out of the show. He seems genuinely upset.
This is a perfect example of a con of crypto/NFT in general. Someone can take it and you wont be able to find them just by the nature of crypto/nft anonymity
Gary vee really played a mastermind here.. The dude got popular by exposing gurus that sell courses. He then ended up selling his conferences, books and now NFT's which is making him banks.. He played the role of being an authentic man but ended as charlatan. Not to mention he uses so many curse words to sound cool which I think is really old now and is rejected by people
The whole *visible on the blockchain* thing isn’t really helping here, is it. Yes, you’ve proven it’s stolen, and contacted the guy who has it……. Now what? There’s no way to enforce it. It’s not flagged or voided or anything. Like if a home security unit told you you’ve been robbed but didn’t call anyone, just gave you a heads up amd now you gotta chase the robbers all by yourself, going “BUT MY NAME IS ON THOSE!”
In a similar manner a lot of anime exist just to be an advertisement and sell manga volumes/merch etc. It's not a novel idea to have your IP be promoted by a garbage show but unless they somehow make it super memable or something no one will ever watch an NFT show lol.
How exactly was the NFT stolen? I'm not that into the technical side of this, was Seth Green somehow scammed and made a mistake or can something like this just happen?
the funny part of this is that there's thousands of these apes and the differences are miniscule, they could just make a tiny unique change to the character, and by the standards of "Uniqueness" in these NFT designs, they'd have a completely new character that they'd own the rights to.
I was fairly sure I was watching a Coffeezilla video until I heard the end.. had to grab my phone and replay the last 5 seconds 😂😂 you did the Charlie sign off! I love it!
Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. What do you want to bet Seth ends up replacing the Bored Ape with a different one, or maybe even a Vee Friend as some brave middle finger to those terrible “hackers & scammers”?
The thing about NFT copyright is the only entity that can enforce copyright is the government He's lucky to have a central authority to regulate copyright because now he can just ask them to maintain his copyright
@@tomasg920 correct me if I'm wrong here, but Bored Ape are generated via AI and it's already been established that AI generated art is not copyrightable. There's nothing, afaik, that would stop him from animated any of the Bored Apes under that law.
I'd speak to Legal Eagle about this... turns out if you sell an NFT you might not be selling the value... if it's stolen seems like the same. Original owner owns the money making magic from these internet jpgs, but once sold, you may well be just the owner of 1s and 0s with 0 value
Why do half of these comments mention “legal Eagle“? Is he the worldwide authority of all lawyers according to people who comment on RUclips or something?
@@codycast no. He's not. But he is a Real lawyer who isn't just a keyboard warrior. It's Legal Eagle and he's way more qualified than both of us combined. He tells us about Real Laws n stuff... but scoff all you want without doing a mere YT search nevermind a Google search.
So, let's assume that the original licensing contract attached to the token specifically says that the rights to exploit the image as IP transfer with the token, and that the initial buyer has to agree not only that if they transfer the token at a later date that they transfer the rights, but also do so under the same conditions somehow, in perpetuity, no matter how many times the token is transfer... that, in and of itself, is a tangled *mess* of contract law that may or may not actually be legal, but fine, let's say that it magically works somehow. He loses his ape, he loses the right to exploit the IP, that's pretty clear black and white. Okay then... so let's take a step back. What would have happened if the ape *hadn't* been stolen? He makes the show, and then at some later date sells the ape token to someone else at a profit. Does the new owner of the token now own *all the work that Seth owned as the original owner* that was based on that ape IP? Does Seth still own the work he made, but now no longer have the right to sell it because it contains IP he doesn't own anymore? If two different people own two different tokens that appear in the show, who has the right to decide if the show can be sold or not, and to whom, and who gets paid if it does? Does every single buyer of the token, throughout all future time, necessarily have to agree to the terms of the original contract of token ownership giving the IP rights, a contract that the new buyer *never originally signed* and in fact *may not even have access to see a copy of when they buy the token*? Does the token being stolen simply void the contract, since the new owner didn't sign onto the license contract (so can't own the IP), but also Set doesn't own the token anymore (so doesn't benefit from the license contract anymore)? If I buy a token without any awareness of any legal contracts associated with it, due to those contracts not being displayed with the process of buying the token, do those contracts still bind both me and the original minter? Since you can't *decline* to have a token sent to you, if you receive a token that has a contract associated with it, and you *don't want* the terms of that contract, what options do you have (particularly if the token has some kind of code in it that prevents you from transferring it except under specific circumstances)? This feels weird.
Nfts as we know it is useless, I can't believe people took such an amazing and revolutionary tech such as blockchain And use it to trade freaking Jpegs
This is a fascinating development. What exactly is the legal enforceability status of the “stolen copyright” here? Is this the first ever case of someone being able to steal the actual legal rights to something? Or has it happened before? Or is this *not* what’s going on here? Would the legal status of the stolen NFT copyright be considered equivalent to the legal status of, say, a contract that was really signed but under fraudulent or otherwise nullifying conditions? I urgently want to see Legal Eagle’s take on this, because I have many many questions about what this situation does or doesn’t imply. It may be that existing law and precedent are too ambiguous, and the current situation too new, to enable a clear judgment yet.
@@JShdwstar nope, unless you are copyrighting the software, which you cannot because they are open source. The decision was clear, art and things created by humans can be copyrighted, machine made cannot, evening they put together elements created by a human in a new form.
@@higunner00 so you have to trace back hard enough to find the original artist of the Bored Ape then, assume there's someone who slammed the templates together.
@@crowdemon_archives sure, you just would have to individually copyright every item, pay the fee (per copyright petition), redact the reasons why the copyright is valid, hope the court determines there's enough creativity in each individual item to be copyright-viable, get the determination of the court of the valid ones and then wait a couple years before being able to sue anyone. A straight forward process really
I love that in a world of NFT bros it's just accepted that possession is ownership. If you steal it - you own it. And they just laugh it off.
"I watched my wife get banged by another guy!"
*laughs in wittol*
And these people still think their garbage will be taken seriously as an investment
Absolutely pathetic
if they admit that stolen nfts don’t really belong to the thieves than they would have to admit that they don’t really own them either
Of course, because otherwise the entire premise collapses
They have to, since crypto/NFT is supposed to be about fuck the man. Can't cry fuck the man if you need the man to get your shit back.
Imagine if Batman : The Animated Series had to be cancelled because someone stole Batman.
The NFTs! WHERE ARE THEY
Hahahahahahahaha nice man!
I got paid to attend veecon. Not sure who paid it but hey free money.
This looked like absolute garbage though lol
Damn you, Joker!
“Everyone loves decentralization until there’s no customer service”
lmao 😂
Wise words
That is so true, but still love btc
And no regulation, or protection against crime or fraud 😂
Anarcho Capitalism be like...
"I'm gonna kick the door in" "I got some top men"
These people really live in a fantasy world. They're imaginary tough guys kicking in doors with their imaginary goon squad, going after imaginary property
You have to pity him. He cannot say "I will hunt you, kick your door and kick your ass", because is Seth Green, a Chihuahua with a hyperactive bladder is far more intimidating
This comment is the best. 🤣
yup
Welp, whatever he did worked lol
Yeah but imagine the short term emotional consequences of becoming honest.
Everyone age 30 or older, try explaining this story to your parents - a truly mesmerizing experience.
I can't explain it to myself
Dude I'm 24 and still have no idea why NFTs are so popular.Unless its money laundering like watches and art.Who tf is actually buying this shit? Mfs are creating their own demand and supply outta thin air 😭.
"What?"
- My wonderful parents every time I tell them what an NFT is
@@Chin-ny4kj It's a lot of money from middle-high class people between 20 and 50 years old, who see the economy stagnating, not being able to do what the boomers promised was possible (e.g. buy a house, keep a marriage), and jump into this crazy shit. They always existed, as well as Ponzi/Pyramid schemes, but now they get more reach with social media and higher retention with tech jargon. It all gets amplified by the minority making big bank hyping it up even more, while the majority losing money (because it's a zero sum game, the dollars anyone earns come from those who lost money) just stay silent. All of that is supported by extremely rich people using a small portion of their money to keep the whole thing afloat because they love the prospect of getting even more money from those poorer than them. In short, they are losers from the 5%, like there have been in every generation, that become desperate enough to jump into these insane promises, plus grifters from the 1% siphoning even more money from them.
Dude Im 20 and dont understand it
"Someone stole my JPEG. I want compensation" will be heard by many a confused Judges in the near future.
@Pinned_by Coffeezilla gtfo fraud
The 2020's equivalent of deciding who gets which Beanie Babies in the divorce.
Yep. That’s all it is without an actual legal document.
I haven't watched it yet, but I'm guessing he gave it away through social engineering or some other tactic.
Not like it matters, it's a jpg of an ape anyways.
not even a jpeg, its a hyperlink to a set of code that describes a thing made by a bot which resides on a "decentralized" platform... yeah that might complicate things even further.
What's ironic about this is if he alters the design of the ape just slightly then it's a different IP (especially when considering how the NFTs are generated) and the show can continue. The reason he'd want it to be his ape is so that the show can inflate the value of his NFT.
it is possible they know this and the entire theft is just advertising. Then he can say heworked it out with the creators of the bored apes to make it anyway.
When the lazy greedy rich get richer then get hacked or scammed ahhh so much relief.
@@roalama1301 A very real possibility. That would be clever marketing.
Exactly. A lotta yall still dont get it. ape holders can use multiple slurp juices on a single ape. so if you have 1 astro ape and 3 slurp juices you can create 3 new apes.
@@Veon1 Wtf is a slurp juice and why is that even a thing?
So let me get this straight:in NFT World, if you steal something, you now own it. Legally it's now yours. 😂
@@FatFrogChonk The difference is that in real world there's a law to protect someone's property. And those law have actual power. Also the stolen stuff can be retrieved.
It's even weirder because there's legal precedent to say because the original product was machine generated it can't be granted copyright.
That's basically how the real world works, good luck getting stolen goods back unless you put a digital tracker in it or something. Most stolen goods in real life are never returned, it's too hard to prove they were genuinely stolen without identifiers.
It's kind of obvious considering possession is nine-tenths of the law. Get out from under your rock and do some book learning.
The entire point of the crypto/NFT world was to have things whose existence was independent of laws or banks. Viva la libertarianism! Up with anarchy! Then when stuff like this happens they cry that governments can't do anything to enforce their ownership. But they made it that way! On purpose!
I hope the writers of Family Guy make a “Chris Becomes Obsessed with NFTs” episode so they can force Seth Green to make fun of himself. Kinda like how they poke fun at his involvement in Robot Chicken.
I would love that
shit that really IS our seth green isnt it 😢 what a way to go down...
Honestly, I think it's an inside job. Seth wasn't getting enough interest so he had to drum up some controversy to get people aware of the show.
Agree 100 percent, it also implies to people that the nft carries property rights when it actually doesn't or hasn't been shown to legally at least
I think this is a great example as to why the blockchain is a terrible place to store your property rights. Either the blockchain means nothing or you have no recourse to theft.
Yes and No. The concept isn't bad however the lack of protections in place is. This will change with the anticipated legislation that will occur.
@@marbleous9170 "Yes and no" get out of here bozo
@@marbleous9170 The concept is terrible. What is the advantage exactly?
@@kevadu The only advantage is that you can legally steal lmao
@@marbleous9170 Blockhain worshippers talk about Decentralization, but in reality you need centralization and govt intervention to protect the people.
I don't understand this drama at all. What is keeping Seth from just making his show anyway? In what court is the "true" owner of the ape possibly going to sue him? All this business about "owning" NFTs is just larping, it has no actual legal standing, does it?
The true owner isn't the hacker, it's someone who bought it from the hacker. If the show makes enough money, I'd imagine that the person who has the property rights would sue to get a cut.
Making a show where you don’t have commercial use rights to the main character is always going to be a risky decision. The new owner is not the scammer either, it’s a secondary market purchaser from the scammer-Darkwing.
The original sale contract states that you get the copyright when you buy an ape. However, if I understood correctly what Legal Eagle had to say about situations like these, the contract doesn't apply to any subsequent transfer of the token unless a new one was signed
Seth also drank the NFT kool-aid, so disregarding the NFT rights would be a hell of a sunk-cost he would have to get over.
Good point
So let me get this straight. Seth had a whole production based off this ape and he decided to keep it in a hot wallet instead of secure in a Ledger? I think it's more plausible that they knew the show was a stinker and made this whole story up.
My man 👍
@Pinned_by Coffeezilla @coffezilla look a bot
This whole thing is so dumb I can't believe it's real.
But people think they make smart investments by buying NFTs, so who knows.
I don't think he knows what a hot wallet is.
I don't think he made it up. I think he got scammed. But he has to play it off like it's not THAT big a deal because he's a celebrity and there's the whole production around it. He can't just go to the corner and cry. Not in public anyway.
To quote a wise man “If we’re being honest, failure was probably the best outcome here.”
I've worked in film and TV and thought about the people who are actually behind making this show. Have they lost their jobs because rights to an imaginary cartoon ape was stolen? Life in that industry was turbulent enough already. Yeah, let's introduce NFTs. That'll make it all better...
I wonder if the show production was behind schedule and this theft is just a convenient ploy to get more time. If the NFT is miraculously returned that would strengthen my suspicion
Exactly! 🤣
The rights to an imaginary cartoon ape, the rights to a talking big mouse, the rights to space wizards with light swords. By that logic there's no copyright infringement to anyone making a new star wars movie. Which is something I support tbh
@@eduardobranco8349 except ppl drew that talking mouse. Lucas wrote and did in some cases draw that star wars IP......alot of these NFTs are generated by machines. And according to US court rulings, they therefore are not able to be copyrighted or trademarked unless substantial human influence is involved in the project.
Seth could have just drawn his own bored ape and given it a copyright, it would been safer and slightly less stupid. There is little real world advantage to an NFT.
If he attached the rights to the nft itself it wouldn't be any less of an issue, if it is separate from the nft there wouldn't really be any point to the nft itself.
They only benefit the creator. Once you buy it, you have to hope someone else values it more than you so you can sell it on and profit.
but then the show would just be about a shitty drawn ape, not a Bored ape NFT - wich is kinda the whole point
@@TimeeeTimeeeTimeee then his lawyers should have known you can’t copyright automated images made by a computer…
@@BBWahoo is this casual antisemitism
One of the most interesting things about NFT copyrights is that most likely they are not enforceable. US courts ruled that a copyright *HAS* to be created by a person. Most of these "Copyrights" are on computer generated images, which do not have enforceable copyright.
Correct, NFTs are just receipts. Most people don't even keep receipts or just throw them away. Since when did record keeping become an expensive art.
Lol I don't even know what they're expecting from this clusterfuck since none of the involved actually made the Bored Ape art. If anything I'm pretty sure only the artist(s) have any leg to stand on in the copyright department.
That is hilarious. I'm hoping IP/Copyright lawyer get their hand on this and prove in court that NFTs are not legally binding contracts.
I hope people realize that NFTs are worth $0
Can’t copyright images made by a computer, you need a human to make the picture.
If that happens does that mean no one owns the rights to the image?
@@jamesrule1338 this is mostly correct, unless the artwork is made by a human.
@@5WIM I hope people like you get educated on the subjects they decide to give their opinion on. But, you're human, I expect you won't.
They're also stuck between rock and hard because if they just went ahead with the show and someone made a copyright claim, went to court, and the court set a precedent that NFT's aren't actual copyright then the whole NFT world would crash instantly.
there's a lag on binance with pair btc / eth almost x 3, i did a vld .
By far one of the funniest things I've seen come from the NFT space, truly phenomenal and most definitely the future of digital ownership.
...and nothing of value was lost.
Yet there is comedic value in this story
@@hippiemuslim More value than an NFT.
This "future" is simply no different than the age of bandits in the Medieval Era where you had no recourse if your property was stolen by another group. Except get a well-armed bigger group to get it back & teach the other guys a permanent lesson...
The funniest thing is though, he couldn't even legally put out the show because the NFT background COLOR matters, which, in animation, you can't do unless he's always against a blank backdrop. If he's not, he is using someone elses board ape with the exact same clothes facial expression.
And that isn't even touching on the fact that if the ape starts talking, it's even MORE at risk of reproducing a still frame of someone else's ape of wearing the same clothes with a different expression.
It's hilarious how bad this is knowing the background color on the NFT matters. I forgot who pointed this out to me but god it was funny.
I came here to ask a question about this very thing.
@@TimmehJay Exactly, legally this couldn't even exist without stepping on someone elses toes. This was a problem upon conception EVEN BEFORE the theft. If anything, the theft of this asset did the guy a favor.
@@Hadeks_Marow It is doubtful if the ape could be copyrighted in the first place.
@@Hadeks_Marow you can’t copyright automated computer progress, these “NFTs” are traits randomized and compiled by a computer.
@@epiccollision @AureaPersona Both of you are right. I forgot about that court case. But it does draw into question what rights are the parent company even offering then??? Cause they claim to be offering commercial rights. . . so how does that work???
Idk why this seems like a marketing ploy as I never heard about this project until after his NFT got "stolen" I may be wrong but nowadays I feel like this would be the type of stuff they would do to hype something.
smells like an advertisement
Good point.
My immediate reaction too
People believe this but don't believe the government stages stuff lol.
You are quite cynical. It obviously comes with a good deal of lived experience. I totally agree.
The whole Nee Eff Tee celeb thing has really shined a light on so many "relatable" celebs on social media...in that they aren't. It was all there just to get fans to like them and buy their stuff, and the fact most of them have doubled down on their apes or whatever has just shown how little they think of their fans. Also Seth has made some good stuff, but that show looks so devoid of any effort it's painful to watch.
I just laughed out loud - imagine calling the police and trying to explain that someone stole your jpeg of an ape.
😂😂😂
I can't believe NFTs are still a thing lol
they're not going to go away. whether interest increases or not.
It's the rash of the internet
@@DragoNate Interest has been tanking. It's a dumb fad.
@@kevadu huh, strange. slight interest goes down over 2 weeks because of $LUNA bank run crashing the market and that means it's "tanking" entirely.
nope. not how that works. nfts are still around, new projects & artworks constantly coming out.
as i said, even if interest decreases, they're not going away.
@@DragoNate I didn't say a word about Luna. Stop creating strawmen to argue with...
NFT trade volume is down like 90% since it's peak late last year. Google search interest in NFTs is about a quarter what it was in January. These are long-running trends that have absolutely nothing to do with the more recent Luna nonsense but I suppose the constant news about scams and disasters in the crypto space doesn't exactly help either.
the hole thing seems like a cheap scam to promote an nft.
It also tells me I can steal their NFTs and not only will I legally be the new owner, they can’t do anything except buy it back.
And this is why my parents always said "Get a Receipt!" and "Get it in writing!" ...when something is vague, unprovable, or in this case, exists only I an intangible, digital form...anything can happen!
The NFT itself IS the receipt. That's why this is funny.
I'm a bit of a Luddite. Unless it's on paper it's not real to me.
Funny thing now is paper receipts are obsolete, as bank records can be used as proof of transaction.
So satisfyingly hilarious to me that this happened in a convention basically designed to promote NFTs. Celebrating the commodification of art on the internet through a TV show is dystopian to me so I love that this happened.
In would be sick to see an animation style like this... without the shilling of NFTs.
The could have done it like Paul Frank, BAPE, and Von Dutch, and plastered it all over overpriced merch.
NFTs and crypto in general seem to be so risky and volatile. It just seems like making a show with an NFT just seemed to be a questionable idea at best.
Be quiet
Probably the only way to monetise an NFT. And with a short shelf life. Folk will soon get bored of bored apes.
Even Frank Paul walked away a millionaire after his cartoon monkeys lost their popularity...
@@MrManio1000 He speaks the truth though
Just tweak the design a bit and slide the hue scale in After Effects. Guy, it's a Bored Ape, not a Picasso, they all kinda look the same 🤦🏿♂️
but then they would admit NFTs are bs
GASP!
YOU...RACIZT!!!!
@@BBWahoo 😂😂😂
Stories like this makes me think that a good percentage of our society is in dire need of lobotomies.
based
Just the wealthy
@@thegmanofEAP
and the people who fund the wealthy, so a sizable chunk of our society, including govt
... have had lobotomies
@@BBWahoo Absolutely. A lotta guys love to give tax breaks to these folks and companies while letting us die. Doesn't change that fact that the rich are leeches
NFTs are a good demonstration how the crypto space confuses possession with ownership, the latter requiring a legal framework to back up your claim.
this whole thing felt way more as marketing gig, i dont doubt that he will get this thing back when this whole mess get cold...
The thing that makes this hilarious is that it is unbelievably stupid that he didn't stash the Ape in a freaking offline hardware wallet. It is so stupid that he wouldn't do that.
Not only that he would've literally had to click on a link and sign a transaction to approve somebody taking it. You have to be a different kind of stupid to do that on its own. Let alone using a wallet with a bored ape in it 😂
Well thats definitely in line with all crypto/nft "investors".
Stuipd drives desperation
No wallet is offline
@@DailyMynt Yes, but the keys can be. Which clearly his weren't.
@@DailyMynt depends what you mean by "wallet". Are you referring wallet to the node on the blockchain or the wallet that holds the keys? There is a problem with the terminology.
He (and anyone else) might still be able to use the NFT... Legal Eagle did a video about NFTs and pointed out that an NFT created by a Computer randomly putting parts together might not have a copyright because it wasn't created by a human. I can't remember the details, and it's probably not something you'd want to go to court over, but it was interesting.
This is also the correct answer.
couldn’t he just “mint” an identical NFT, but change 1 pixel to a slightly different colour, then use it instead. problem solved…?
@@Tommmmmmmmmmmm From how proud these guys are of their nfts. It legit doesn't matter how easy it is to make an identical picture. He's doing this to generate value so he can sell the nft later on. Nft people won't buy a duplicate of that picture. It's not the one that exact one that Seth made a show with. So it's worthless. If he makes a show with a different one nft people will simply not want it as much and Seth doesn't make as much money
@@Tommmmmmmmmmmm I'm not a lawyer, but I'm confident that changing a single pixel in an image would not give you a copyright to the "new" image. That would be like removing a single frame from 'Avengers End Game' and that giving you a copyright to the "new" version.
The point of my comment is that there's a good chance that nobody owns the copyright to the image because it was generated by a computer so, it might not meet the requirements to have a copyright in the first place.
If there's no copyright on the ape then anyone could make a show or merch using the ape regardless of who owns the NFT, so Seth could make his show. No need to waste time minting a new ape.
If you bought an NFT I actually will laugh at you until I’m dead.
You should laugh at me, I do. But I made a grip buying and selling them. Just widgets to me.
@mVP I think I love you.
If you bought an NFT* WITH THE INTENTION OF KEEPING IT
This is kind of the main issue with NFT’s. Possession is apparently all the law and Seth Green cannot “somehow”
Legally prove ownership despite being able to prove purchase of it?
I came here to learn how to invest after listening to a guy on radio talk about the importance of investing and how he made $960,000 in 4 months from $160k, somehow this video has helped shed light on some things, but I'm still confused, I'm a newbie and I'm open to ideas.
It is possible to produce superior performance provided you do something different from the majority. However most of us tend to pay more
@@Maricel_oronan Exactly, the trick is to diversify your investment, don't panic when everyone else is and invest consistently.
@Dwayne Wright Hello Do you trade on your own?
@Dwayne Wright That's impressive. Are you giving her your money or the money stays in your trading account? What's really the idea behind copying trades.
@Dwayne Wright Is her service available outside of the US? As her broker is registered in the US.
Even dr evil thought Scotty was idiot he just needs to “zip it”
When something comes along, you must ZIP IT
Zippy Longstocking
That show was to be destroyed by critics anyway. Seems so bad it could only achieve success in the future as a cringy cult.
probably the goal to get attention to his nfts
The point is not to be good, the point is to reinforce in-group mentality. It is not about advertising your product to someone else, but to say to members of your own group that "look at what we did, imagine the thing we can do, so hold onto your NFTs".
In fact, criticism is welcomed because that only reinforce even more: look at all these snobbish critics who don't get it, remember that they are our enemies, and don't listen to whatever the enemies say, regardless of logic.
"Code is law", so if the code allows you to effectively take possession, it's tough shit.
How would this stop the series?
If Seth gets sued the "owner" of the nft will have to identify themselves. And then they will have to answer in a real court why they are buying stolen "goods"and refusing to return it when the original other contacts them
The guy has already been found, BuzzFeed interviewed him. He's reached out to Green, but he hasn't indicated he's willing to give it back.
What a shame to see Seth Green get into NFTs, I loved him as Joker in Mass Effect.
Loving him was your first mistake
Don't worry, he's still Joker in Mass Effect
Sifu...we ever going to see you bash Dan Lok anymore? I remember those days where I would repeat 'I AM A FUCKEN BENTLEY'.
Hahahaha, the burden of a decentralised network... You can't track down the accounts involved in the fraud at all. This stuff is definitely the future, guys!
I used to really love Seth Green but this makes me judge him heavily especially since he's buddies with Gary Vee. So basically his NFT was taken by someone who pretty much exploited the biggest loophole flaw of them and Seth still can't see how awful they are?
Seth Green is unbelievably pretentious
1:50 'I don't know why people are laughing' because seth's stupidity is hilarious lmao
By real owner we mean on chain. But if you want to enforce off chain you have to admit to buying stolen good so … Seth is in the clear?
I laughed out loud when I read the title lmfao
If he used the image anyway, would that not force the person that stole it have to come forward to defend their new ownership, thus revealing who they are?
Code is rule bro, if the blockchain says you owne it then you are the owner. Doesn't matter if you bought it from a hacker
They aren't the hacker, just the new owners. The hacker sold the NFT on second market, the current owner have clean hands.
@@lestinmurillo2566 that's not how copyright law works though
@@fritz404 try to explain that to crypto bros, not me.
@@fritz404 If it's even covered by copyright law.
The interview at the con is just... delusional. That guy sounds nuts. And yeah that one last point could be summarized as "Big price, no value".
Anyone who says that they have "Top men" on a job absolutely DO NOT.
May ask which authority/Entity would enforce the commercial rights to the said NFT?
No one. It's not regulated yet.
@@PointsofData then that show cancelation is just a load of bs to not release that embarrassment
@@HHmz-rp8ht the fact it's not regulated yet probably isn't something he's privy to, and he's just going along with "person who owns this owns the IP" because that's what's being told to him by the crypto bros. If that makes sense? I wouldn't say it's a lie to get out of the show. He seems genuinely upset.
Can we hear a lawyer cry over how this story is mangling IP and copyright law?
I secretely hope its some kind of public stunt, so NFTs look more ridicilous and useless
This is a perfect example of a con of crypto/NFT in general. Someone can take it and you wont be able to find them just by the nature of crypto/nft anonymity
"Stolen NFTs get blacklisted and nobody is going to buy it from you"
Sure, buddy.
"I don't know why everyone is laughing when he said someone stole his NFT".. Cos it's hilarious, that's why
His ape is gone.
Any chance this is just part of getting attention to the show?
I feel like you'd be extra careful with that NFT.
Probably just got "stolen"
Sounds like a publicity stunt to me.
Gary vee really played a mastermind here.. The dude got popular by exposing gurus that sell courses. He then ended up selling his conferences, books and now NFT's which is making him banks.. He played the role of being an authentic man but ended as charlatan. Not to mention he uses so many curse words to sound cool which I think is really old now and is rejected by people
This just sounds like a “NFTS ARE REALLLL!!!!” scheme
The whole *visible on the blockchain* thing isn’t really helping here, is it. Yes, you’ve proven it’s stolen, and contacted the guy who has it……. Now what? There’s no way to enforce it. It’s not flagged or voided or anything. Like if a home security unit told you you’ve been robbed but didn’t call anyone, just gave you a heads up amd now you gotta chase the robbers all by yourself, going “BUT MY NAME IS ON THOSE!”
It would only help if the receiving address is tied to a KYC account, whether it be direct or indirect.
In a similar manner a lot of anime exist just to be an advertisement and sell manga volumes/merch etc. It's not a novel idea to have your IP be promoted by a garbage show but unless they somehow make it super memable or something no one will ever watch an NFT show lol.
Pokemon, Yugioh, DBZ, Beyblade, etc...
@@charlesm.2604 Western properties like G.I. Joe, Transformers, Thundercats, TMNT, basically any other big name cartoon from.the '80s.
Except anime is good. Let alone the fact you have animes that are completely original IPs created to just entertain people and sell the show itself.
They should really make it one of those “perks” that only NFT holders have, please deprive the rest of us from accidentally ever watching this mess.
Yep, also with some animated TV shows existing to advertise and sell their respective toy lines.
How exactly was the NFT stolen? I'm not that into the technical side of this, was Seth Green somehow scammed and made a mistake or can something like this just happen?
Green supposedly got phished, which caused someone getting access to his NFT wallet and allowing them to steal whatever was there.
the funny part of this is that there's thousands of these apes and the differences are miniscule, they could just make a tiny unique change to the character, and by the standards of "Uniqueness" in these NFT designs, they'd have a completely new character that they'd own the rights to.
WE NEED a Legal Eagle Crossover examining this!
This is truly the future of entertainment
When the drama and beef built around it is more important as the annoying show.
"I get it, art has to make money." That's the real point here. Art DOESN'T have to make money. All art has to do, is exist.
Ars Gratia Artis.
Capitalism was a mistake
@@MrHendrix17 Amen brother. Amen, awomen, and amenbies.
But have you ever tried eating or paying rent with free art. It ain’t easy.
NFT's aren't art either.
I was totally unaware seth green was involved in this scam shit. Guess i'll add seth green to the boycott list.
I was fairly sure I was watching a Coffeezilla video until I heard the end.. had to grab my phone and replay the last 5 seconds 😂😂 you did the Charlie sign off! I love it!
I'd love to see anyone trying to exercise their rights. I don't think you can get legal ownership by stealing. NFT or not, that's not how things work.
Just make more Robot Chicken. That's all we want, Seth.
Seth: You got it! Here are Robot ChickeNFT's
Always the best news! Thanks coffe
How did the nft get "stolen"? Like, someone accessed his account transferred it?
Imagine putting value in none real, none value, and very much a stealable asset.
Sounds like a publicity stunt to me. What do you want to bet Seth ends up replacing the Bored Ape with a different one, or maybe even a Vee Friend as some brave middle finger to those terrible “hackers & scammers”?
the whole NFT bullshit looks like a scam....
Looks like a scam
Walks like a scam
Quacks like a scam
The thing about NFT copyright is the only entity that can enforce copyright is the government
He's lucky to have a central authority to regulate copyright because now he can just ask them to maintain his copyright
no, the copyright is with the owner, and he doesn't own it anymore. that's the whole point of NFTs (and one of the reasons they are so stupid)
@@tomasg920 correct me if I'm wrong here, but Bored Ape are generated via AI and it's already been established that AI generated art is not copyrightable. There's nothing, afaik, that would stop him from animated any of the Bored Apes under that law.
@@digitalzushi this is the only and correct answer
@@tomasg920 the computer that made it is the owner? Now next step is?
@@tomasg920 The U.S. government is not going to punish him if he can prove someone stole his NFT copyright
I'd speak to Legal Eagle about this... turns out if you sell an NFT you might not be selling the value... if it's stolen seems like the same. Original owner owns the money making magic from these internet jpgs, but once sold, you may well be just the owner of 1s and 0s with 0 value
He would tell you there is no copyright.
Why do half of these comments mention “legal Eagle“? Is he the worldwide authority of all lawyers according to people who comment on RUclips or something?
@@codycast I think NFTs are dumb, but his video explaining *potential* issues they have is being taken as settled fact by too many people.
@@codycast no. He's not. But he is a Real lawyer who isn't just a keyboard warrior. It's Legal Eagle and he's way more qualified than both of us combined. He tells us about Real Laws n stuff... but scoff all you want without doing a mere YT search nevermind a Google search.
I just sold 6 of my 1's and 0's and made a profit of $1200; I don't know what your definition of "value" is.
this is beyond a clown show, straight up a parallel universe from my nightmares
"We've got the best people on it" - if those people aren't Coffeezilla, then you don't have the best people
It’s easy to maintain an RUclips channel when the jokes made themselves 😂
If it was me I'd take this as a lesson learnt.
Glad you did a video on this.
My Stoopid Friend: Some thief stole my jpeg.
Me: "No problemo." I have it backed up on my Google Drive.
Feels more like the show tanked in pre-screening and this is a convenient way to cope out.
Just when I thought that Seth Green couldn't make anything worse than recent Robot Chicken
So, let's assume that the original licensing contract attached to the token specifically says that the rights to exploit the image as IP transfer with the token, and that the initial buyer has to agree not only that if they transfer the token at a later date that they transfer the rights, but also do so under the same conditions somehow, in perpetuity, no matter how many times the token is transfer... that, in and of itself, is a tangled *mess* of contract law that may or may not actually be legal, but fine, let's say that it magically works somehow. He loses his ape, he loses the right to exploit the IP, that's pretty clear black and white.
Okay then... so let's take a step back. What would have happened if the ape *hadn't* been stolen? He makes the show, and then at some later date sells the ape token to someone else at a profit. Does the new owner of the token now own *all the work that Seth owned as the original owner* that was based on that ape IP? Does Seth still own the work he made, but now no longer have the right to sell it because it contains IP he doesn't own anymore? If two different people own two different tokens that appear in the show, who has the right to decide if the show can be sold or not, and to whom, and who gets paid if it does?
Does every single buyer of the token, throughout all future time, necessarily have to agree to the terms of the original contract of token ownership giving the IP rights, a contract that the new buyer *never originally signed* and in fact *may not even have access to see a copy of when they buy the token*? Does the token being stolen simply void the contract, since the new owner didn't sign onto the license contract (so can't own the IP), but also Set doesn't own the token anymore (so doesn't benefit from the license contract anymore)? If I buy a token without any awareness of any legal contracts associated with it, due to those contracts not being displayed with the process of buying the token, do those contracts still bind both me and the original minter?
Since you can't *decline* to have a token sent to you, if you receive a token that has a contract associated with it, and you *don't want* the terms of that contract, what options do you have (particularly if the token has some kind of code in it that prevents you from transferring it except under specific circumstances)?
This feels weird.
Nfts as we know it is useless, I can't believe people took such an amazing and revolutionary tech such as blockchain And use it to trade freaking Jpegs
Shame he didn't have the means to stop it being stolen lmao
You can’t steal code, he didn’t own anything,
Oh, wait...
Seth Green has no idea what "exploiting IP" means apparently.
1:35 The bored ape licence probably still applies to Seth, the person who stole it had no contract with the original creator of the ape
What if Seth green hired you the great internet detective to find the scammer that would be a great episode of the nft show
This is a fascinating development. What exactly is the legal enforceability status of the “stolen copyright” here? Is this the first ever case of someone being able to steal the actual legal rights to something? Or has it happened before? Or is this *not* what’s going on here? Would the legal status of the stolen NFT copyright be considered equivalent to the legal status of, say, a contract that was really signed but under fraudulent or otherwise nullifying conditions? I urgently want to see Legal Eagle’s take on this, because I have many many questions about what this situation does or doesn’t imply. It may be that existing law and precedent are too ambiguous, and the current situation too new, to enable a clear judgment yet.
None. The image is computer generated. There's already a decision that only HUMANS can create copyrighted material.
@@higunner00 But someone created the computer program that created that image. That makes it a piracy case.
@@JShdwstar nope, unless you are copyrighting the software, which you cannot because they are open source. The decision was clear, art and things created by humans can be copyrighted, machine made cannot, evening they put together elements created by a human in a new form.
@@higunner00 so you have to trace back hard enough to find the original artist of the Bored Ape then, assume there's someone who slammed the templates together.
@@crowdemon_archives sure, you just would have to individually copyright every item, pay the fee (per copyright petition), redact the reasons why the copyright is valid, hope the court determines there's enough creativity in each individual item to be copyright-viable, get the determination of the court of the valid ones and then wait a couple years before being able to sue anyone. A straight forward process really
You sir, inspired me to start my RUclips journey. Thank you 😊
The fan is spinning the wrong way.... that would blow air up, not down...
Imagine if the reason why Rick and Morty was never made as beacause someone stole Morty before it even aired lmao.
Considering current events we would’ve probably been better off 😅