ONE PROBLEMATIC ASSUMPTION

The token is a representation of the artwork and you can view it in virtual galleries online, you can resell it, you can print it out(in the case of still images), and in the future, you'll probably be able to do even more

This is not always the case... I keep looking at different standard terms from different marketplaces and they often use very vague terms and then on their site they indicate when they deem that term to mean. The issue is that the NFT can be moved from marketplace to marketplace and the definition of that term like "private" becomes unassociated specially problematic when different marketplaces or authors assign to it different meanings. The description of the right needs to be on the picture itself. I have read some definitions that make me wonder if you can literally do anything besides look at it inside your collection page in your marketplace. Maybe you can but the wording made it seem like you couldn't.

However if what you assume in the statement above is true then we're in business and NFTs are very awesome. Specially when you consider all the tech that can come about in the future and you can sign a transaction of proof and the NFT gets used in that unique tech. So yeah NFTs are cool... but the issue is recklessness. But yes all those techs will require a duplication of the image into that new tech i suppose.

But yes even without any right to duplicate and even if it were just a token with a fun thumbnail that you couldn't even share in a post the NFT still has value... just a lot less because you couldn't display it anywhere except ... i guess your marketplace collection page? But yes it still has value... but people need to realize how that value differs from the ability to display it in a house or even in a museum either digitally or physically. Traditionally art has been displayed.