Block/Allow - same coin, different side. Does ownership necessarily preclude public access? Does it make sense to own something that’s ‘public‘? Should public access preclude ownership rights? How can you control ‘the thing’ once everyone has it? Presumably, if monetizing _is_ your desire, you of course want maximum exposure, but also maximum possible control, right? Because presumably you’d want to prevent others from stealing and monetizing your idea. Where does common culture fit in? How is this conversation dissimilar from that of DRM on physical CD medium, and of Copyright + IP theft in general? Layers of abstraction where we now have fuzzy boundaries and situational application of rules will become abstracted. Will ‘Reader’ apps need to be re-written to respect ACL’s? Think of choose-your-own-adventure literature, fan-fiction, even writing publicly-discoverable alternate endings to existing works! If you want to monetize video, you might serve frames-at-a-time or by the batch or minute; charge differently for fast or slow up/down links, etc. But if you can simply ‘record it’ via analog and re-monetize it as your own, can that ecosystem flourish properly? ‘Tokenization’ of ‘the real world‘ is not simply a matter of printing a QR code and slapping on a product. That only solves one part of the equation. Much of the existing monetized world of products is very linear wrt costs and resources; once a seller gets paid, they wash their hands of it. Once the product is squeezed out of the factory, it’s no longer the manufacturers responsibility to deal with the waste, but no singular individual is empowered to actually solve the problem of production waste and ultimately pollution. That’s just one example of straight-line production, but there are many more, and that model is in a way antithetical to an absolutely holistic and self-contained economic system like BitCoin.