Art provenance blockchain
This is where simple, efficient, and accessible art tagging and collections management meets unlocked financial value and trust. Register or confirm an artwork's unique identity with an adhesive, tamper-evident, NFC-enabled Certificate of Authenticity that timestamps and writes its data to a secure, blockchain-powered database. Trace the history and provenance of a work's ownership back to the original artist or owner through a secure, aggregated record of provenance. Improve collection management and oversight by directly connecting to your artwork.
We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Content:
- Sailing to Byzantium – Blockchain and the art market
- Blockchain technology and art
- Blockchain art: Opening new avenues for artists and collectors alike
- Blockchain for the Art Market: applications and implications
- Why Provenance Matters for NFTs & What It Is (With Examples)
- Verisart, an art and collectibles provenance startup, has raised a $2.5 million
- Transforming the art industry with Blockchain
- Blockchain Art Collective
- Start-up uses art of blockchain to protect artists' work
- How blockchain technology reached Christie's and changed the art world along the way
Sailing to Byzantium – Blockchain and the art market
What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun. Those words from Ecclesiastes might seem an odd way to start an article on the latest thing in digital connectivity: the new way of building trust that has powered the rise and fall, and rise again of digital currencies, promising to build trust and utterly transform markets of all sorts, including the art market; but there is the eternal truth that human nature does not change, however much technology may transform the way in which we do business.
Currency as a medium of exchange supplanted barter and provided a store of value which was liquid. Double entry book-keeping gave an ability to record and understand transactions. In the seventeenth century, the founding of the Bank of England and the creation of the national debt — lending to the government which the investors did not expect to be repaid, provided that the government continued to service it — unleashed a huge tide of investment.
One can think, no doubt, of other examples, but what lies at the heart of all of them is the notion of trust. You will not do business with another person unless you have trust. It might be trust in the other person — I should not want to lend to the government unless I trust that the government is be able to service the debt — or it might be trust in the medium of transaction — I shall sell you my chickens in the market place not so much because I trust you, as because I trust the coin which you will give me as I hand you my chickens — or it might be trust at a more abstract level — I can risk making an investment in your business or you might risk investing in my business because I know, through double-entry bookkeeping just what my net worth is.
If trust is impaired, business is, at best, inhibited and, at worst impossible. It is no coincidence that the national economies which prosper are those which have in place legal structures which tend to engender confidence and in which the judges are not corrupt.
In the virtual world, where you cannot see the person with whom you are transacting, nor visit him in his shop, the issue of trust assumes particular importance. The European Commission sees the building of trust as essential for unlocking the potential of e-commerce in the EU [1]. It is arguable that the art market has not yet achieved its potential for building a trusted space in which to do business. What blockchain technology can potentially bring to the party is the building of trust to create conditions in which markets can flourish.
However, if we lack a clear idea of how blockchain technology actually works, a discussion as to its potential benefirs and risks can result in little more than a utopian wish list — a triumph of hype over experience. One of the great frustrations of reading about blockchain is that many of those who set themselves the task of explaining it tell you what they believe it does, rather than explaining what it is, and often what they think it does is received wisdom, leading their expositions to founder on the Scylla of over-simplification.
Others, who do understand what it is, often presume on the part of a general readership a level of familiarity with what might appear to be arcane technical concepts which such a readership does not possess: anyone for Byzantine Fault Tolerance? Their expositions thus founder on the Charybdis of incomprehensibility to all but fellow experts.
Neither approach really facilitates a consideration of the benefits nor an appreciation of the risks involved in the use of blockchain technology. Essentially, it is a database which contains a record of transactions, for example, that A transferred an asset cash, a container load of tuna, or whatever on a given date and time and at a particular price. That is, essentially, the sort of information which people have been recording in ledgers almost since the first cuneiform characters were inscribed on the first clay tablets in ancient Nineveh.
Some of us still use paper ledgers, but, mainly, we use spreadsheets which are maintained in digital form. Now, a merchant keeping a paper ledger, or a spreadsheet, will keep a closed ledger, which is to say that only he can write in it, and he may or may not want to let a potential customer look at it. So, the issue of trust arises. Can you trust what the merchant has written in his ledger? This is where the idea of an open ledger comes in. It is a ledger which is potentially open to everyone both to maintain and to consult.
However, just because everyone can see it, does not make the information recorded in it any more trustworthy. This is where the idea of a distributed open ledger becomes important. The ledger does not exist on a single computer: it is distributed amongst all of the computers, or nodes in the network.
All of the nodes in the network store the ledger and all iterations of the ledger are the same, and, therefore, equally authentic. For this to be achieved, all of the iterations of the ledger require to be synchronised with each other, so that if a change is made in one iteration, all will show that change.
Therefore, for the distributed open ledger to be maintained, constant interconnectivity is required. If there is a later sale of the same painting, that also shows in the ledger. The utility of this in terms of transparency and the recording of provenance is obvious. So far, so good, but there are obvious problems if that were all there were to it, such as the risk of false entries being made or retrospective changes being made to genuine entries.
With a conventional centralised database, you have to trust the person, for example the auction house, which maintains the database, but you also have to trust the robustness of its defences against hacking and other unauthorised alterations in the record. With large and reputable actors, trust in the person may not be so much of an issue, but there have been so many high profile and successful hacking attacks that there is a lingering impairment of confidence in the system — the very issue highlighted, in the context of e-commerce, by the EU Commission in the paper referred to above.
It might be thought that the same issues would arise to a more pronounced degree with a distributed open ledger, not least because of its open nature — Surely anyone could write in, or delete data from the ledger?
In the event, this is neatly circumvented in the case of blockchain technology by a combination of the use of encryption and the very architecture of the system itself. The ledger is distributed across all the computers, or nodes, in the network. This is the model on which Bitcoin operates: a permissionless distributed open ledger which uses blockchain technology. Not all ledgers are permissionless. It is perfectly possible and, indeed, not uncommon to have a virtual private network which runs on blockchain technology.
The ledger relies on a two stage verification process with asymmetric encryption. Every user has a public key, which is shared with others to allow transactions to take place, and a private key which is not shared. The private key has a mathematical relationship with the public key, as a result of which the private key is able to decrypt data which has been encrypted through the use of the public key. The data which is added to the ledger does not necessarily have to be encrypted, but unencrypted data can, of course, be read by anyone with access to the system, and because of the necessarily limited size of blocks, the storing of unencrypted data is not generally practicable.
It is the function of the miner to aggregate data so as to create a new block which is then hashed to the chain. As a result, a chain can end up being comprised of a long series of blocks. The hash is cryptographic.
Such a cryptographic hash is a one-way function which cannot be reverse engineered. In other words, once a block has been hashed to a chain, it cannot be altered or deleted.
By this means, the problem of retrospective alteration, referred to above, is circumvented. This question is essentially the same as a well-known thought experiment in the field of cryptography known as The Byzantine Generals problem [2].
Suppose that a Byzantine army is surrounding an enemy city. The army is split into four divisions, each of which is under the command of a general. The divisions are separated from each other and the generals in charge of each division require to communicate with each other through messengers, who may require to pass through enemy held territory.
If all four divisions attack at the same time, the city will be taken, but if only three or fewer divisions attack, they will not be strong enough, will fail to take the city, and will suffer heavy losses. In order to ensure that any attack is co-ordinated, all the generals have to agree to co-ordinate their attacks: if one of the generals has not agreed, the others might attack not realising this.
Unless all have repeated the message, there is no assurance it has been received by all. If all four generals are trustworthy, that is no problem, as they they will each respond as they are supposed to, and all will know that all four divisions will attack simultaneously.
However, suppose that it is known to the generals that one or more than one of them is, or may be, a traitor, but it is not possible to say which. In that event, each of the loyal generals will relay the message that the other generals have ordered an attack at dawn, but the traitor generals will relay the message that the agreement is say to retreat.
In that event, each of the loyal generals will have received contradictory commands, but they do not know who is loyal and who is a traitor. What are they to do? They could do nothing unless there is unanimity, but the nature of the problem is that there is no unanimity. Accordingly, they require to develop a protocol for reaching consensus. This is essentially an analogy for the situation in an open distributed ledger.
The generals are nodes on the ledger network. In the case of the generals, as it happens, consensus on a reasonable plan to attack at dawn can be achieved if more than two thirds of the generals are loyal [3]. Thus, in the example above, if two or more of the generals are loyal, consensus can be achieved, but if only one of them is loyal, there is a problem. In the case of blockchain, rather than generals, there are several ways to achieve consensus.
This is the version which is the closest analogue to the thought experiment. However the protocol used in bitcoin mining is the protocol known as proof of work in which the process of hashing a block to the chain is effected through the solution by a miner node of a mathematical puzzle derived from the data involved. Such a puzzle can be solved only through the use of in computing terms brute force.
The puzzle is offered simultaneously to all miner nodes and devised, so far as possible, to give them all an equal chance of solving it — the main variable is the level of computer resource that is put into solving it. In order to provide an incentive and recompense for the cost of the resources deployed , the first miner to solve the problem is given a small financial reward. Though immensely difficult to solve, the solution is designed to be easy to verify, in this instance by the other nodes on the network.
There also exist other consensus protocols, for example, those using proof of stake, which is based on the use of digital signatures, but these are not further considered here.
In short, the consensus protocol which is used ought to eliminate the risk of false data being inputted to the ledger. From the above discussion, it will be seen that a distributed open ledger ledger using blockchain technology has the following characteristics:.
Having those characteristics, such a ledger can be used to be used to trace assets. For example, the WWF is presently running a test project to use a blockchain to trace tuna from where it is caught, down the supply chain to final sale to consumers [4]. The application of these characteristics to the art market holds out tremendous promise.
Enthusiasts list the following possible benefits [5] :. The benefit which clearly jumps out is benefit 3, improving provenance and reducing art forgery. Clearly, blockchain could be used for creating a central register on which a painting whose authenticity has been established is entered and each time it is sold, the details of the sale are added.
In the case of new art, however, a complete provenance can be established: the art work is placed on the register by the original artist and each sale is recorded. This also has the effect of increasing transparency as to price and, it is suggested, giving to the market the level of confidence required to grow the market and drive up prices. Benefit 1, it is suggested, will allow artists to embed their digital works in the blockchain and thereby control the sale of copies up to whatever edition limit they might have set.
Benefit 4 flows, it is suggested, from benefit 1, facilitating a further payment to the artist on second and subsequent sales. This resale right, is, of course, a statutory right in the UK, but is not in other jurisdictions. Benefit 2 might be the most intriguing. Works of art are already value stores. Art works can be held as investments, and sometimes are kept securely in secure stores, rather than exhibited on the walls of a home, office or museum.
If the art work is is recorded on the register, it is but a short step to regarding the entry as a form of or at any rate, certificate of ownership. It becomes, as it were, an analogue of a bitcoin, and can be split into shared ownership. There is, first, the obvious point that no system involving human agency is ever foolproof, however good the technology may be.
Blockchain technology and art
By Will Allen and Andy Parsons. Illustrations by Pia Blumenthal. Imagine strolling through downtown Manhattan in New York City and happening upon an art gallery. You walk inside and immediately see a piece that catches your eye. Could this really, truly be a Rothko? Unsure, you ask the gallery manager.
Blockchain art: Opening new avenues for artists and collectors alike
In , over USD 64 million worth of art was sold on the art market. The paper-based nature of art transactions creates authenticity issues and prevents provenance tracking, which eventually increases the risk of fraud. With this solution, you can coordinate and trace interactions between all the parties involved and add any additional functionality such as co- investment, patronage, depositing, IoT and geolocation sensors, tokenization and more. The blockchain based model enhances process efficiency and resilience. It helps to boost the transparency, reliability and security of all interactions between all parties. Svetlana has more than 20 years of finance, accounting and tax experience, includi Please enable JavaScript to view the site. Blockchain Art and technology. A blockchain based model enhances process efficiency and resilience In , over USD 64 million worth of art was sold on the art market.
Blockchain for the Art Market: applications and implications
Provenance is essential for establishing the legitimacy, value of a work of art, as well as a core ethical consideration for museums. For example, provenance issues are notoriously difficult for the period between and in Europe, the time of Nazi rule. The National Archives estimates that some 20 percent of the art of Europe changed hands during Nazi rule. Colonial provenance is yet another ethical matter that museums have to contend with.
Why Provenance Matters for NFTs & What It Is (With Examples)
Deloitte Luxembourg has developed a technological alternative to the paper trail that normally proves the provenance and movements of an artwork. The Deloitte ArtTracktive proof of concept provides a distributed ledger for tracking the provenance and whereabouts of fine artworks. The blockchain-based application manages the interactions between all parties involved, from the artist or the owner of the piece of art, via freight forwarders, customs, art galleries, museums and all the way to potential buyers. When this technology is used in the art market, all events in the life cycle of an artwork are recorded and traceable. Due to the paper-based nature of art transactions, there are numerous provenance and traceability issues related to artworks. The players of the art market still rely on paper certificates and receipts which can easily be lost, tampered with or stolen—and history has shown that fraudulent certificates of authenticity are not uncommon.
Verisart, an art and collectibles provenance startup, has raised a $2.5 million
Author: Contributor Date: December 20, Blockchain is an optimal environment for storing data in a permanent and immutable way, making it great for verifying the origin and ownership history of any item. This has opened up opportunities for a number of blockchain -based provenance solutions. These solutions help you trace item ownership, reducing the risk of intellectual property theft and forgery. Blockchain provenance refers to processes used for verification, storing, tracing, and auditing ownership data of any kind, be it artwork, supply chain information, or financial assets.
Transforming the art industry with Blockchain
We asked both of them a few questions in advance of the panel discussion to get a better understanding of their companies. Q: How does an artist get their work on the Intaglio Blockchain? Can anyone do it? For an artist — as well as a dealer, gallery, or auction house — you first must get credentials.
Blockchain Art Collective
For the past few years the art world has been experiencing an increasing interest in the many possibilities that the digital sphere has to offer when it comes to the intersection of art and technology. One of the most thought-provoking conversations that have surged is the one around Blockchain, which has been introduced to the art market as a new ground breaking tool that might tackle some long-standing issues, such as the difficulty of accurately tracing the provenance of an artwork or the challenge to provide an innovative digital infrastructure for sales. Yet, after countless of tedious discourses in conferences and discussions on the topic, are we sure we understand how this technology works? Blockchain is a shared, public transaction book that everyone can have access to but which no user has the power to control. It is a database that maintains an ever-growing list of transactional data records, whose security against tampering and revisions is guaranteed by the use of encryption.
Start-up uses art of blockchain to protect artists' work
A presumed Japanese citizen in his mids, he is the famed inventor of Bitcoin, the cryptocurrency. A by-product of this invention was blockchain technology, which is now used extensively in a range of industrial applications. Rather recently, the art world began to take note of this technological revolution and started manipulating it to drive their solutions for some of the common problems which plague artists, collectors and other institutions in the art world. One of the primary and most fundamental issues this technology is addressing is that of provenance and authenticity. The intervention of blockchain is also opening up an entirely new market of crypto-art and digital collectibles, which create new opportunities for both the creators and consumers of art, namely artists and collectors, both individual and institutional.
How blockchain technology reached Christie's and changed the art world along the way
The art world has faced many challenges and possibilities. One of the most exciting developments that we in the arts face is the advent of blockchain technology in the trading and cataloguing of art. There are various business models adopted by some overseas auction houses that are using Blockchain in their art business. Where all details of an artwork are entered into this registry, it offers tracking of ownership, authenticity and provenance.
There are no comments yet.