<ul>
<li>Damien Hirst, a renowned yet controversial artist, faces allegations of backdating over 1,000 paintings in his NFT project "The Currency."</li>
<li>Sources claim that the paintings, purportedly created in 2016, were actually mass-produced in 2018 and 2019.</li>
<li>Lawyers for Hirst argue that the 2016 date represents the conceptual inception of the project rather than the actual production date.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Damien Hirst accused of backdating over 1,000 paintings in his NFT project "The Currency," raising questions about the legitimacy and value of his works.</strong></p>
<h2><strong>Damien Hirst Under Fire For NFT Project Following Exposé</strong></h2>
<p>Damien Hirst, best known for his provocative artworks, is under intense scrutiny following revelations that he backdated more than 1,000 pieces of art in his NFT project "The Currency." The project, launched in 2021, involved 10,000 physical paintings, each corresponding to a digital NFT. Hirst had claimed these paintings were created by hand in 2016. However, sources reveal that the paintings were actually mass-produced in 2018 and 2019 by a team of nearly a dozen artists in the U.K., operating on a "Henry Ford production line."</p>
<h3><strong>Physical Copies of Damien Hirst’s ‘The Currency’ NFTs Go Up In Smoke</strong></h3>
<p>In a controversial move, Hirst allowed purchasers of "The Currency" to choose between keeping the physical painting or its digital NFT counterpart. In 2022, he burned the physical versions of those who opted for the NFT, claiming it was a necessary step to transfer the artwork's value digitally. "A lot of people think I’m burning millions of dollars of art but I’m not," Hirst told the BBC. "I’m completing the transformation of these physical artworks into NFTs by burning the physical versions."</p>
<h3><strong>Conclusion</strong></h3>
<p>The allegations against Damien Hirst for backdating paintings in his NFT project "The Currency" have sparked significant controversy. If proven true, these claims could severely impact his reputation and the perceived value of his works. As the art world continues to grapple with the implications of NFTs, transparency and authenticity remain paramount. This case serves as a stark reminder of the importance of integrity in both traditional and digital art markets.</p>
