Topic: can bitcoin be protected by freedom of speech? (Read 2612 times)
this thread is from 2011, funny 10 years pass and the same problems still remain and will continue to remain for several years. the laws are made in a context where they will always have to be revised. I think that 10 years from now a lot will have to be revised, luckily the path to bitcoin regulation will be smoother and all countries in the world have accepted bitcoin
for bitcoin itcan.be said that itis.a country that decides.if the country legalizes.bitcoin then of course the freedom of speech will be listed by itself.because each country
hasits.own regulations.especially regarding a legal issue, but if something has.not been.legalized.then it.will be very difficult to be given freedom of speech in.the eyes of the law,it.depends.on each government
hasits.own regulations.especially regarding a legal issue, but if something has.not been.legalized.then it.will be very difficult to be given freedom of speech in.the eyes of the law,it.depends.on each government
The governments of the world will piss on your rights to freedom of speech, if you use anything to evade taxes and if they cannot manipulate the thing you are using as a payment option. It is after all about "control" and we know Bitcoin is removing some of the control that these governments have. 
Our rights are trampled on every day, so trying to legitimize Bitcoin with "Freedom of Speech" trickery ..is not going to change the way governments see Bitcoin. (Crypto is a threat to their control)
Our rights are trampled on every day, so trying to legitimize Bitcoin with "Freedom of Speech" trickery ..is not going to change the way governments see Bitcoin. (Crypto is a threat to their control)
If a country has laid out some laws to ban crypto I don't think you can get away with the freedom of speech ticket. But then again it all depends on how serious they treat crypto usage, by the way it's one thing to use it and another to talk about,so it all depends.
Btw Crypto started from the shadows and grew were it is today,so freedom of speech shouldn't be a problem, you can express yourself while being behind your keyboard.
Btw Crypto started from the shadows and grew were it is today,so freedom of speech shouldn't be a problem, you can express yourself while being behind your keyboard.
Getting back on topic, "Re: can bitcoin be protected by freedom of speech?"
Trying to tie use of ANY currency to 'Freedom of Speech' is ludicrous. Rates with up there with saying that using foreign currency vs your countries native fiat is 'Freedom of Speech' and must be allowed...
They are vastly different concepts
Trying to tie use of ANY currency to 'Freedom of Speech' is ludicrous. Rates with up there with saying that using foreign currency vs your countries native fiat is 'Freedom of Speech' and must be allowed...
They are vastly different concepts
I believe that we will see whitelisting (and therefore blacklisting) of addresses as commonplace practice in the future.
I don't think you can kill bitcoin. Every politician has their grubby hands in it right now, hiding money.
It is perfect for them. They will never have the selflessness to throw this ring into Mt. Doom.
I don't think you can kill bitcoin. Every politician has their grubby hands in it right now, hiding money.
It is perfect for them. They will never have the selflessness to throw this ring into Mt. Doom.
sr. member
Activity: 1820
Merit: 418
Need a campaign manager? | Telegram:@worldofcoinss
Well, Government can introduce their own crypto and force people to use and disregard any other crypto but i don't see it happening in most countries, maybe in China, it can happen.
Second, They can indirectly ban bitcoin by banning the mining in their country but it will not completely stop the network, it will slow the network and people have to pay more in fees to get their transaction get confirmed quickly, Due to the fact a loss of huge hash rate in the network.
Second, They can indirectly ban bitcoin by banning the mining in their country but it will not completely stop the network, it will slow the network and people have to pay more in fees to get their transaction get confirmed quickly, Due to the fact a loss of huge hash rate in the network.
The idea of having freedom of speech goes both ways just as how there are two sides on an coin. It can either be good or bad depending on where the speech is coming from and to the way the listeners or readers interpret the speech. There may also be cases where these speeches get exploited to give a meaning far from its true intention which is pretty common nowadays with the media. But yes, Bitcoin as it is can prove to be very difficult to ban just like that. But still, there can be a number of things that if ever happens will result in bitcoin being banned and one of these things is as mentioned above: freedom of speech.
It can't and if they find a reasons to think that BTC is real threat they'll ban it. But it still can't be killed unless you destroy the whole internet.
I feel this could happen if BTC is not used to launder money for bad people to use and trade illegally, if identities are clear or exchanges should have KYC measures in place. There's no reason why BTC shouldn't be protected because it's transparently and transparently traded.
An interesting legal idea here:
Quote
I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues.
I tend to agree with that.
Look at the Liberty Dollar guy.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
Arguably that was a trademark/intellectual property issue since he used the term" dollar".
That touches on a different point. Intellectual property and trademark laws are violations of free speech too.
I believe that as well. However, the SCOTUS subscribes to a different, flawed logic system.
I have to laugh every time an American refers to their constitution as if it's relevant.
America has been in a state of emergency since 1933. The constitution no longer applies.
America has been in a state of emergency since 1933. The constitution no longer applies.
Freedom of speech only means no law is allowed that would prevent people from expressing their opinions (afaik, ianal).
A Bitcoin transaction is nothing more than a expression of your view of who should be the new owner of your coins.
Very true. +1
Freedom of speech only means no law is allowed that would prevent people from expressing their opinions (afaik, ianal).
A Bitcoin transaction is nothing more than a expression of your view of who should be the new owner of your coins.
Look at the Liberty Dollar guy.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
Norfed tried this defense. The Liberty Dollar warehouse receipts have this printed on theom:
"Receipt is an exercise of the bearer's First Amendment right to petition the government for a silver based currency as mandated by the US Constitution."
Freedom of speech only means no law is allowed that would prevent people from expressing their opinions (afaik, ianal).
Quote
I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues.
I think that's a bit too simplistic in today's world - "passing around (signed) messages" is basically the only thing the internet does, so if you see that protected by freedom of speech there would be no such thing as cybercrime, right?
Execpt that here the message is nothing but an arithmetic transfer of some artificial amount.
Quote
I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues.
I think that's a bit too simplistic in today's world - "passing around (signed) messages" is basically the only thing the internet does, so if you see that protected by freedom of speech there would be no such thing as cybercrime, right?
Freedom of speech was probably originally not intended for anything like the internet, where "speech" suddenly got much more powerful - a simple data-packet (=speech) can be anything, from intellectual property to malicious code.
Although I do sympathize with the "no data packet is illegal" point of view but to justify that only with the first amendment is probably not enough. On the other hand I am not from the US, so I might be wrong about how far you go with freedom of speech.
Sadly, with the "magic words" mentioned, severe cuts to basic civil freedoms seem to be justified pretty much anywhere in the world...
Look at the Liberty Dollar guy.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
He got it in the pooper from the feds.
Arguably that was a trademark/intellectual property issue since he used the term" dollar".
That touches on a different point. Intellectual property and trademark laws are violations of free speech too.
Jump to: