Although CryptoPunks v1 is no anymore considered real, its authors are said to have traded 210 ETH when the bundled editions acquired popularity.
There were about 10,000 CryptoPunks acquired and brought to the secondary market throughout its original launch. This was before consumers uncovered a major smart contract hack that allowed Punks customers to retrieve their Ether after acquisition. As a consequence, the v1 collection’s producer, Larva Labs, revoked its certification of it, patched the vulnerability, and produced the v2 Punks set that they already had. However, by offering dozens of their very own V1 Punks, they’ve issued confusing statements regarding the collection.
A Long-Overdue Fight
The struggle concerning the ownership of the CryptoPunks v1 collection is starting to heat rapidly as the photos’ market value has risen. The Larva Labs serving OpenSea with such a DMCA, take-down demand, and participants of the v1 group responding from their own. To make matters more complicated, Larva Labs designed the smart contract to be irreversible. Therefore, one collection, which is v1, might never be deleted without simultaneously destroying the v2. In both these populations, the subject is still very divisive.
Cointelegraph chatted to Brittany Kaiser, co-founder of Own Your Data, with the support of CryptoPunks v1’s community administrator, @irishnftgal. Brittany purchased a v1 CryptoPunk on OpenSea around January 2022. She considers Larva Labs’ creation from one of the earliest punk avatars to become a significant element of the NFT historical past.
Brittany found it shocking that Larva Labs’ developers flipped after making 210ETH from the sale of 40 wrapped CryptoPunks v1. Rather, individuals went out of their way to sabotage the validity and authenticity of the same CryptoPunks 1 collection. The creators have stated openly for decades that such coins are a component of the original, according to Britanny.
Brittany believes that perhaps the greatest conclusion for Larva Labs would be for them to assume accountability for and control of the blockchain properties they sell. Revocation of the DCMA, she believes, might be a nice beginning, and a rational explanation would be much nicer.
Numerous individuals of the v2 society have turned a cold ear towards the v1 society’s attempts to make oneself recognized. Member lookinrare#0911 stated on the main Discord that she should consider them a risk. But in the conclusion, people constantly knew v1 Punks weren’t real punks. Those were nothing more than relics that contributed to the formation of Punks.
Concerns with the collection’s legitimacy are really not only about NFTs’ ideology; they also have significant financial implications. On the one side, previous attempts to defame the v1 collection have resulted in a drop in its base values. As a result, v1 holders suffer severe damages. Justifying the v1 collection, on the other side, will indeed instantly boost the overall amount of CryptoPunks from 10,000 to 20,000. It would also reduce their availability and likely lead the cost of v2 Punks to drop. To the delight of v1 Punk owners, their NFTs may appreciate in value due to their unexpected fame.
“The views and opinions on this Crypto News Website are solely those of the authors and contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of iBaseTrading or its partners.”