Coming to think of it, putting “n/100” and the artist’s signature on a print, and then considering it more valuable, is not really a lot weirder than an #NFT

the exclusivity of NFTs only really comes to shine with all the future nft integrations. Skins in games like League of Legends or Fortnite are already a multi billion business. Generalized nft clothing for games might be a multi trillion business in the future.

Think of it as limited edition adidas shoes that you can only „wear“ in a game if you proof nft ownership. Of course there might be copies, but other players can easily see if the signature of that shoes you are wearing belongs to adidas

But who needs NFT/Blockchain for this? Since this is all about well known brands (whose authenticity/identity is established outside any blockchain), adidas could just sign proof of purchase with a single digital certificate. Why burn the planet?

I'd argue that it is both cheaper and more convenient for companies to adopt issuing NFTs on Ethereum L2. NFTs are a standard based on ERC721 with a common API and there exists countless 3rd party integrations already.

A proof of purchase certificate is worthless if i can't do anything with it conveniently... adidas would need to define a standard, build a platform and marketplace, integrate with all other clothing brands... on top of this they would need to lock in their users on this platform

and "burn the planet" is not a valid concern anymore with Ethereum, since the community is switching to PoS in Q1 and there are already L2 solutions that offer extremely cheap/free minting of NFTs incl. CO2 compensation for the environmental impact Ethereum currently still has.