But the NFT is supporting them directly, if they minted it.

I personally think NFT's are silly, but there's zero argument to be made that they aren't supporting the artist. The artist minted them in the first place.

> The artist minted them in the first place.

That's completely false. Anyone can mint an NFT. Artists have minted some of them, and other NFTs are created without the artists' permission.

I don't get why people are saying this when it's so obviously false, like, it does not pass the smell test for basic credibility.

Are pirate NFTs selling for a significant price? Clearly people are making them without permission, but are people buying them? The high-profile mega-money examples for sure are being minted by the artists.

Obviously the discussion is about NFT's the artists minted themselves.

Counterfeits isn't relevant to the discussion here. It's like complaining that tipping a server doesn't work because the cash might be counterfeit. It has nothing to do with the main point.

Generally when the artist endorses it. NFTs give you a token that represents a piece of art they made which you can move and resell independently, even if the artist is no longer around. I personally am not very likely to buy any, but I can see the appeal (it's much the same as owning the originals of any other bit of art as opposed to a copy). The current cost of creating and moving them around is unfortunate, however (and reflects the immaturity of crypto as a whole. I believe ethereum is working hard to improve their scaling with a plausible plan, so this should improve, but it is a definite problem at the moment)