Cointime

Download App
iOS & Android

OpenSea Addresses Scammers With New Collection Settings, but They Create New Issues for NFT Teams

So, I ran into a new and exciting issue on OpenSea yesterday as I was doing some setup for a new ETH smart contract — claiming and setting up the collection on OpenSea.

As most people who’ve been in the space for a while already know, scammers are everywhere in web3. And since there’s so much $$$ in the NFT space, scammers have complicated matters for marketplaces and for NFT teams alike.

Here’s an example of the problem I’ll address here: You’re doing an NFT drop in the next 6 months. It’s going to be called “Nuclear Cat Squad.” (I just made that up. Hopefully there isn’t an actual “Nuclear Cat Squad” already.)

Anyway, so you start doing your various hyping on Twitter and elsewhere, pasting sample NFTs, building up your audience, etc.

At first no one cares because it’s tough to get noticed. But after months of work, you’ve got yourself 10,000 Twitter followers and word is spreading. All is going well.

And then… someone on your Discord says, “Hey, what’s this?” And they link to a collection on OpenSea. Some scammer has collected every single preview image you’ve posted, created an OpenSea account / collection, and has of course taken the name “Nuclear Cat Squad” as well as the URL “nuclearcatsquad” (which is what OpenSea uses for the URL of your collection).

The above scenario has happened about 8 million times to people. It’s actually something that, very early on, we all expected to happen. And so we came up with this process:

Our Previous Solution

To avoid this, we would always advise our clients to grab a temp wallet, go to OpenSea, and setup a whole bunch of collections. We would have them setup “Nuclear Cat Squad” as well as “Nuclear Cats” and “Nuclear Cat Squad NFT” and various other similar names (and also similar URLs). To some extent, this seemed to have deterred scammers, although you can never get ALL of the names you want, and scammers will find a way.

Anyway, when it came time to launch, we would deploy the contract, mint an NFT, and then head over to OpenSea to setup the actual collection. We would have the client login to OpenSea at the same time, and we would have them change “Nuclear Cat Squad” (and the “nuclearcatsquad” URL) to something else (like “Nuclear Cat Squad Old” and “nuclearcatsquadold”). This would free up the names for us to use, using their deployer wallet. And thus, we’d get the actual, desired name and url for the collection.

We’ve actually got a handful of clients with forthcoming collections who’ve done the above already.

OpenSea’s New Code

Yesterday, though, I noticed that the above approach no longer works. When I had the client go in and change his “Nuclear Cat Squad” and “nuclearcatsquad” to something else, it didn’t let me take the name (even if it DID indicate that the name was free). Instead, it alerted me that the name was “too similar” to something else that existed already.

It suggested I reach out to support if there is something wrong. (So, I did that. Will update with their resoponse.)

What’s Wrong Here…

So, I suspect this is one of those good/bad moves that coders can make sometimes. You implement a fix, but the fix creates new problems!

It’s a good thing for existing collections, of course. If someone tries to start a new “Bored Ape Yacht Club,” it’s going to know (rightly so) that this is probably a scam.

But OpenSea’s solutions creates a big problem for unlaunched collections: If NFT teams can no longer create temp / placeholder collections to reserve the official names, then it’s almost 100% certain that scammers will be grabbing/using those names/urls before any collection launches. That’s what they’ve always done, and that’s what they’ll certainly continue to do.

Thus, launching a collection will ALWAYS be a problem from here on out on OpenSea. Anytime you launch, you’re going to clash with whatever scam set has grabbed the name and URL you’d wanted. And so you’re going to have to contact support and hopefully work it out. But that’s going to take time, which is not always in high supply during an NFT launch.

What Does OpenSea Recommend?

I’m awaiting a response to a support ticket on that, in which I’ve asked this question. Will update with their recommendation, if they respond.

NFT
Comments

All Comments

Recommended for you

  • A Total of 37,212.18 DMD Permanently Burned Over the Past 7 Days

    July 9, 2026 — According to the latest on-chain data released by DMDAO, a total of 37,212.18 DMD has been permanently burned over the past seven calendar days through the protocol's predefined trading and wealth management burn mechanisms.

  • Whale Transfers 1,133 BTC to Coinbase Prime, Valued at $71.48 Million

    According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a whale transferred 1,133 BTC from Coinbase to Coinbase Prime through an intermediary wallet, valued at $71.48 million.

  • U.S. AI Chip Stocks Decline Before Market Open, Intel Falls Over 3%

    On July 7, U.S. AI chip stocks experienced widespread declines before the market opened. Intel dropped over 3%, while AMD, Qualcomm, and NXP fell more than 2%. TSMC, Broadcom, and Tesla decreased by over 1%, and NVIDIA declined by 0.7%.

  • China's Central Bank Increases Gold Reserves for the 20th Consecutive Month

    As of the end of June, China's gold reserves stood at 75.44 million ounces (approximately 2,346.446 tons), an increase of 480,000 ounces (about 14.93 tons) from the end of May, which reported 74.96 million ounces (approximately 2,331.52 tons). This marks the 20th consecutive month of gold accumulation.

  • China's Foreign Exchange Reserves in June at $341.6262 Billion

    On July 7, China's foreign exchange reserves for June stood at $341.6262 billion, a decrease of $26 billion from the end of May, representing a decline of 0.75%, with expectations set at $343.2 billion.

  • U.S. Storage Stocks Drop Pre-Market, SanDisk and Micron Down Over 4%

    On July 7, U.S. storage concept stocks collectively fell in pre-market trading. Western Digital dropped over 5%, SanDisk and Micron Technology fell over 4%, Seagate Technology declined over 3%, Rambus fell over 2%, and SMI fell over 1%.

  • U.S. Stocks in Optical Communication Sector Drop Pre-Market

    On July 7, stocks in the optical communication sector of the U.S. market collectively fell pre-market. Astera Labs dropped over 4%, while Marvell Technology, Credo Technology, and AXT Inc. fell more than 3%. Tower Semiconductor, MaxLinear, Corning, Applied Optoelectronics, GlobalFoundries, Lumentum, and Qorvo all declined by more than 2%. Coherent, Nokia, Amphenol, and Broadcom dropped over 1%.

  • Pre-market Decline in U.S. Storage Stocks

    In pre-market trading, U.S. storage concept stocks experienced a widespread decline, with Micron Technology falling by 4.8%, SanDisk dropping over 4%, Corning down more than 2%, and Intel decreasing by over 3%.

  • Two Departments: Support for Reinsurance Institutions to Increase Capital and Issue Supplementary Capital Tools

    On July 7, the National Financial Supervision and Administration Bureau and the Shanghai Municipal Government released several measures to accelerate the construction of the Shanghai International Reinsurance Center. Among these measures, they proposed to enhance the quality and efficiency of the reinsurance industry, support reinsurance institutions in increasing capital and expanding shares, and issuing supplementary capital tools to improve the capacity for internal capital accumulation and external capital supplementation, thereby strengthening the reinsurance industry's capabilities. The initiative aims to guide the insurance industry to focus on major national projects, strategic emerging industries, and livelihood security, consolidating insurance and reinsurance underwriting capabilities to enhance risk protection levels. It also supports reinsurance institutions in leveraging their professional technical advantages to assist the insurance industry in reducing risk.

  • Sources: Saudi Arabia Plans to Expand Oil Pipeline to Red Sea, Increasing Capacity by 2 Million Barrels Daily to Bypass Strait of Hormuz

    On July 7, five informed sources revealed that Saudi Arabia is considering expanding the crude oil pipeline capacity to its western coast on the Red Sea, allowing Saudi Arabia and its neighbors to transport more oil without passing through the Strait of Hormuz. This east-west pipeline, built in the early 1980s, has gained strategic importance since the outbreak of the Iran war in February and the disruption of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. The pipeline can deliver up to 7 million barrels of crude oil per day to the Red Sea port. The CEO of Saudi Aramco stated in May that approximately 2 million barrels are supplied to west coast refineries, while about 5 million barrels are for export. Sources indicate that Saudi Arabia is in preliminary discussions with some neighboring countries regarding the pipeline expansion, aiming to add about 2 million barrels of pipeline capacity per day. It remains unclear whether Aramco's planned expansion involves upgrading existing infrastructure or constructing new pipelines. One source mentioned that the expansion plan also includes a smaller refined oil pipeline. Two sources indicated that the expansion scale could range from 1 million to 2 million barrels per day, with refined oil also being considered. Another source stated that the project would take several years and cost billions of dollars, requiring adjustments to Saudi crude pricing mechanisms.