Topic: And now they're saying a hard fork could entail legal repercussions. (Read 838 times)

icebreaker will be sad when Riccardo Spagni (Monero) has to register for fincen and then icebreaker will need to pay licence fee's for his monero..

.. oh what the article is fud, .. icebreaker will be relieved

12 implementations?! I have 2 thought provoking threads about the potential of smart contracts collecting dust. How many more r3kt threads do we have to suffer through?

Challenge: build a smart contract C to release the drones d at time n if x number of r3kt threads have been created.

Icebreaker has been on my ignore for a while, but I happen to see this.

"Written by an actual lawyer"...oooooh....lmao.

I guess Icebreaker hasn't figured out yet that lawyers' jobs
are to argue a certain position.  I can find an equally qualified
lawyer to argue just the opposite of what it says in the article.

Derp.

legal ?

Wallstreet is legal even if they have forced nation to print money.






Bitcoin is the model of transparent AND SO LEGAL think.
It don't lie.

So what if core does the fork?  All devs go to jail?  Give me a break.

lol not grounded..

otherwise the fork of 2013 would make blockstream liable .. using your logic..
oh and the segwit code changes.. will make blockstream liable .. using your logic..

so much laughs today

lastly.. 2mb proposal is not limited to classic.. there are 12 different implementations that all can input the rule change and the miner flags..
thats right miners running core can continue running core and just change the 1 byte flag in their data to show their intentions.
and then change the max block size if the target is reached.

its not code limited to classic..

thats right core can input the changes too.. its not a classic vs core.. its a people vs adam back. where adam back will continue to refuse to stay with the people even when the minority moves against him.
adam back will be the one sticking his head in the sand playing with clams and having to get fincen registered (if the article was legally correct, which its not)

but for laughs lets use icebreaker logic
Charles Lee (litecoin) needs to go to jail for not registering their coin invention?
vitalik buterin (ethereum) needs to go to jail for not registering their coin invention?
wait for it, here is the punchline..

Gmaxwell and Adamback(liquid & sidechains) needs to go to jail for not registering their coin invention?

Ooh man Gleb and iCEBREAKER in the same thread!

*popcorn time*

Legal repercussions? LOL. To the taxman or even the FBI, Bitcoin Classic, Core or XT are exactly the same thing. Why should they bother make a difference? You can be a butcher, a salesman or a plumber, and the taxman doesn't care, you'll get the same treatment.

Hey, I'm just here to spread FUD till they pay me my standard extortion fee, of which Leroy Fodor has yet to read the memo. HAHAHA

Gleb's on the job.

Your questions were already answered in the article.

If you care to read it again (this time with comprehension), you will find that Bitcoin, being created by the anonymous Satoshi, has no principles for FinCEN to have jurisdiction over.

On the other hand, Classic is being created by identifiable individuals, many of whom live in the US and other NATO/FACTA countries.

Please learn to read more effectively, and stop misleading people with such trivially debunked fake 'gotcha' questions.

The essay was written by an actual lawyer.  You aren't a lawyer, you are just some stupid-as-shit Gavinista that isn't even especially literate.

The only reason you're straining at the article's well made points is that it's not pro-Classic.

But the essay is factually grounded, and pretending it's all just a big lie won't help Team Classic when the TLAs come knocking.

Don't know how they missed it since Straus and Friedberg are buds with Patrick Murck and Jon Matonis.

I'd say they're somethin' goin' on behind the scenes that smells like Limburger.

Straus and Friendberg came onto the Bitcoin scene just prior to the infamous run-up in 2013, the same time, or just prior to when Patrick and Jon joined to The Bitcoin Foundation goin' through all its moneys while under their watch.

Not just Daniel S. Friedberg (Dan; Danny), but also Ryan J. Straus: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.13877909

The core devs? Maybe the foundation? What a joke, these guys never really understood how bitcoin works do they.

It is not possible.  Bitcoin is a decentralized situation and it is it not possible for a lawsuit.  Who do you sue?

So the guys in charge of the financial system designed to bypass overbearing authorities, try to do overbearing authority stuff. Sweet move.

That's bullshit. Mr Friedberg is just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame. And no, if this was true, it's not just problem of XT/Classic but Bitcoin and Cryptos in general. Core devs too will have to fork sooner or later. Same goes for any open-source applications (started unanimously).

that is so stupid, sometimes I wonder where people get off.....

What a good laugh! This article is hilarious... Legal what?!? Seriously...


Why? Is Bitcoin registered on FinCEN? Seriously...


MSB's are exchanges. Bitcoin is a currency... It has no laws beyond the laws defined on the code that runs the system.


Once again, if this has to be enforced in case of a Bitcoin fork, why wasn't this enforced straght away by authorities since the genesis block?

I could go on... This is seriously one of the wierdest articles I've ever seen. Legal problems are what exchanges face when they "lose track" of customers funds. People show know better about these things already. Attemps to control or regulate Bitcoin at the core level will fail.

According to this CryptoCoinNews article, anyhow. This is something that the few remaining Bitcoin XT supporters (if any) and Bitcoin Classic supporters will need to think about.