Authenticity is essential to conversations about traditional art as physical artworks are tied to a commercial market where these objects are then commodified, authenticated, and assigned value. However, digital artworks are "intangible artifacts" that do not fit this model of being able to be authenticated and owned in a traditional sense. This leads to questions about how to establish the authenticity of a digital artwork. It also raises the question of whether digital artworks should be subjected to authentication and commodification in such a manner. The various issues in applying traditional artistic conceptions of rarity, value, and authenticity to digital art make it challenging to attempt to commodify digital artworks, as digital production defies concepts of ownership and rarity. Additionally, by applying blockchain technologies to authenticate and regulate digital artworks, contradictions arise as this transfers financial commoditization and capitalist goals to digital artistic expression while empowering artists and artistic communities.

How Can We Verify Digital Art? 

One of the key issues in this topic is how to create an effective method of establishing the authenticity of digital artwork. Current technology may help show the origination information of a digital artwork, such as metadata that shows the creator's information. However, metadata does not always have to be present in these digital files; they can be easily copied and disseminated widely online. While it is always a good rule to attribute work to an artist, this is not always the case. Likewise, without creator information attached to a file, nothing prevents others from taking credit for this work or using it for commercial purposes or purposes not intended by the artist. Overall, the need for ways to authenticate and protect digital art is evident. 

One issue that arises is whether digital artworks should be authenticated in this manner, as the mode of production seems to defy traditional ideas of artworks' value being based on "novelty, rarity, and exclusivity." While physical artworks can be owned, and their medium opposes duplication, making them rare and valuable, digital artwork exists in an environment that seemingly invites duplication and dissemination. What does it even mean to "own" a piece of digital art? By definition, digital art is "created, stored, and distributed via digital technologies." While the creator's intellectual property is safeguarded and recognized in the case of human artists, there are challenges in creating a limited quantity that would make the concept of ownership applicable in a digital environment. 

Regarding intellectual property, digital works of art fall under copyright laws, which protect the artist's or creator's ideas. In this sense, authenticating or finding the origin and creator of digital artwork is essential in allowing a creator's intellectual property to be guarded. However, this type of authentication is distinct from actions taken to financialize these digital works. Furthermore, some would argue that originality, authorship, and copyright become even more problematic with digital artworks, as the "inevitable outcome of placing copies" throughout the digital environment challenges the view of copyright as an "economic right." Why would an artist keep creating without clear economic rights and incentives attached to digital art and intellectual property? Digital artists have a different level of financial outcomes than artists working within traditional artistic mediums. Without authentication and the ability to make digital artwork scarce and therefore valuable, artists may face challenges in earning a living through their artistic practices and reaping the rewards of creating. Consequently, this issue requires a solution to ensure the digital environment can store, safeguard, and transmit digital art.

Some argue that blockchain technologies can solve the problem of unauthorized distribution and use of digital artworks. However, it becomes complicated, as others note that blockchain is also part of the problem of allowing digital artwork to be commoditized. Some artists, especially in new media art, pull inspiration from the ideas of Marcel Duchamp and how he attempted to draw attention to the issues of replication and his "aversion to the commercial art market and traditional art museums." In this sense, the digital mode of production has always contained an element of resistance to traditional ways of thinking about artworks as products to be sold. However, some can blend their desire to challenge the conventional art world with blockchains, using blockchain technology to decentralize the digital art world and empower artists. These individuals believe blockchain can challenge "elitist structures in art production." However, it should also be noted that blockchain has a danger of turning art into tokens or assets with value and prices assigned. This is the very definition of commoditization in the traditional art world, which digital artists often oppose. 

Monegraph: A Case Study in Digital Art Authentication  

One blockchain initiative that aims to create a solution and allow artists to gain financial rewards for their art is Monegraph. This online platform can track a digital artwork's movement and verify its authenticity and origins. In addition, it can attach digital licenses to digital artworks. However, this type of blockchain solution ultimately blends intellectual property policy and "high-efficiency financial technology" to regulate the digital art market, just as the traditional art market has historically been regulated. To circle back to the notion of intellectual property, economics comes to the forefront as a primary reason copyright and IP are so important to a capitalist society. While financial benefits for artists and protecting their art are important, separating this from the commoditized art market becomes challenging. Some blockchain proponents argue that digital art "has so far failed to achieve its potential."(McConaghy 19) The central argument for digital art's failure revolves around the lack of financialization of digital artworks, and they argue for blockchain technologies that can transform artworks into digital assets, changing business. 

Overall, it becomes clear that blockchain technology can offer both solutions and challenges to the issues of authenticity that can occur with digital artworks. What becomes even more evident is a disconnection between digital environments, modes of production, and traditional conceptions of artworks. While traditional artworks are physical materials that invite ownership and rarity and create value with their scarcity, digital artworks exist in an environment that defies ownership and limited quantities. The visibility of digital artworks is high and difficult to limit. As such, the perceptions of value will likely be diminished for digital artworks. The challenge of authenticity is also caused by digital files not always having identifying information, which makes it challenging to attribute creator information to artworks. Ultimately, these issues combine to create a situation where authenticity is required but must be done in a manner that does not replicate the same traditional art market problems of hyper-commodification, hierarchies, and businesses/galleries profiting over artists.