Definitely interested to hear arguments to the contrary though.
In a theoretical sense I can see how they'd be valuable - limited supply and high demand and all that - but in practice it just seems like the prices of some of these early ones are too bonkers for it to be sustainable.
Essentially what you do is just encode a trusted party (or multiple) and do what they say. This way you get "trusted" data in the blockchain for scripts to use. For instance, who owns a house, or the closing price of a commodity, or who won the super bowl (or an election). As you can imagine this just makes them a target for corruption.
One possibility that occurs is: for decentralized infrastructure, where no organization can attest to the identity of an original author, then it might make sense for that author to 'claim' their content when they upload it (at which time, for most authors, it would have zero value).
That could be a way for authors to retain and claim value for their work over time, while also making a public copyright claim.
That's all conjecture on my part; I don't really understand the hype yet, either - or whether it will last.
A risk that springs to mind is: unlike the legal concept of copyright ownership, an NFT could easily be accidentally lost by the person who holds it.