At first glance, PornstarPunks looks like a promising, if ribald, take on established NFT tropes: collectible digital assets based on porn performers.
There's only one problem. The creator didn't bother to get permission from the adult entertainers depicted in the collection.
One creator, porn performer-cum-financial adviser, said she was alarmed to know that her name and likeness had been included.
She said that it was salt in her wound. This ugly NFT was not authorized by me.
As such, the "PornstarPunks" collection is yet another example of the type of abuse we see over and over in the world of the internet. The value is being taken from people in an industry that is exploitative and harmful.
The collection was removed from Open Sea's website.
The mission of Open Sea is to build the most trusted and inclusive NFT marketplace with the best selection. Intellectual property and publicity rights are protected by our Terms of Service, and it is a violation of our policies to violate them.
It's terrible that it was allowed to sell the NFTs for a long period of time. If it had gotten consent and given a cut of sales to adult content creators, it would have been a good idea. Adult actors often struggle to monetize their work in the long term, so using digital collectibles like NFTs for some recurring revenue from resales could be a promising complement to subscription based porn services.
If the creator of the collection had operated ethically, he could have approached individual performers for permission to use their names and likenesses and compensated them fairly.
The creator of the project, who didn't reply to multiple requests for comment, just started pocketing revenue.
The project embodies the worst aspects of NFT culture. Even by NFT standards, the art just sucks. It began to include representations of actual porn performers as well as fictional characters, Lego figurines, and public figures who aren't in porn, all without the permission of the porn industry.
The whole thing feels like a greasy cash grab with a bunch of garbage thrown at the wall to see what sticks. Most of the collection didn't pick up a lot of value.
The collection serves as a rebuke of the common narrative that there is a valuable opportunity for adult content creators when it comes to the use ofcryptocurrencies. Sins, who has gotten into the NFT space himself as both an owner and the creator of a forthcoming collection, might be right. For most, it's the same thing as its role in the art world: as another way for artists to be taken advantage of.
"I don't think it's possible to solve sex workers' problems with technology," DeVille said. Sex workers' billing issues are not solved by the use ofCrypto. It's not true that the payment processor issues are solved by the use of crypt. If you want to exchange yourcryptocurrencies for US dollars, you have to go to a bank. It doesn't matter if a bank won't work with porn stars. It is not stable and not usable.
People in DeVille's position have a lot of legal recourse. Depending on your perspective. Although the collection is almost certainly violating copyright law by using the names and likenesses of performers without their permission, it's likely that a realistic legal strategy was used.
If anyone finds themselves depicted by an NFT without their permission, their best bet is to submit a Digital Millennium Copyright Act request through Open Sea.
Being your own online legal representative is a common reality in the world of adult content creation, where content is constantly stolen and reposted without permission.
Most adult models and adult content creators are familiar with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, because their content is stolen all the time.
Legal precedent that isn't yet set will determine whether or not people who have their art or likeness stolen by NFT grifters end up with any further legal protections. DeVille has a general sense of disgust.
"This is a NFT scam," DeVille said.
There's more on porn. Openai says it is incapable of making porn.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
