Topic: Class action Litigation vs. Bitcoinica Consultancy LTD & Intersango LTD - page 5. (Read 26991 times)
July 16, 2012, 01:34:40 AM
I think anyone that was expecting to get their money back after the hack and this terrible processing of refunds was a bit naive, litigation should have been started at day 1. Of course they should pay back, but someone bought Bitcoinica for its brand. With the right investment the buyers of Bitcoinica could have opened a new bitcoin exchange, but they would have to compete with Bitcoinica. Now after 2 months of a delay in processing refunds with no real oversight on how or to who they pay back first (I wonder if those associated with Bitconica got their money out), the Bitcoinica brand is dead. If the Bitcoinica owners actually solved this mess, would anyone actually use a service called Bitcoinica? Of course not.
Now that the investor's money is dead and they have to start from scratch they have one solution: delay. The longer they delay the less likely people request their money back. First say the clients will get 50% back and see if they come back for more. For the rest take a very long time in refunds and make recovery efforts cumbersome. By delaying the investor's loss is not so bad.
July 16, 2012, 12:58:36 AM
I just want my bitcoins back, but if they plan on keeping them, then we have a problem
There's been no official statement to date about what their intention is regarding resuming the processing of refunds. Amir said he thought there'd be a forced reduction of 30% in refunds but obviously that isn't a decision Amir is able to make alone and if Patrick has walked away then who knows when Donald and Amir will be able to agree on a plan.
I do think that it's time Donald stepped up to the plate and brought some clarity to the situation. It's unfair for Amir to always be placed in the position of delivering messages regarding the refunds when he's had minimal involvement in the process.
July 16, 2012, 12:35:42 AM
I just want my bitcoins back, but if they plan on keeping them, then we have a problem
July 16, 2012, 12:27:07 AM
What exactly shall be the goal to be reached by legal action?
Please clarify!
- (1) we want to destroy Intersango exchange
- (2) we want to ruin Core credit finnancially
- (3) we want to destroy the reputation of Zhoutong, Tihan, Donald, Patrick and Amir and turn them into "persona non grata"
- (4) we want to destroy the economical existence of above mentioned people
- (5) we want to force those folks to collaborate with the police to chase the hacker(s) and put them in jail
- (6) we want to construct a case of precedence, so that in future no 17-year old entrepreneur without proper business education and governmental approvement can start a hightly profitable business.
- (7) we want to get our money back
Just decide on what the real goal should be.
Then decide what strategy could lead us to that goal,
and if it is feasible and likely to reach that goal.
Plesase, folks, really do that, instead of
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
...one hundred further pages in this forum....
7, we are all for 7, we couldn't care less about anything else.
July 15, 2012, 10:56:11 PM
We want to make it clear we won't stand for the business owners to steal from us, directly or indirectly?
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
So for you, it isn't really about recovering your funds...it's about attempting to exact a pound of flesh from the operators of Bitcoinica. Nice.
I'm curious, how much MORE are you willing to come out of pocket to try to make your point? As repentance pointed out, international litigation doesn't come cheap.
July 15, 2012, 10:36:06 PM
We want to make it clear we won't stand for the business owners to steal from us, directly or indirectly?
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
Do you have any proof of the fact that they're stealing from you? If not, the most you can do is "gross negligence" as to be practically criminal. Anything beyond that is just tinhattery. Remember, stupidity on an epic scale is really indistinguishable from malice.
July 15, 2012, 10:30:22 PM
What exactly shall be the goal to be reached by legal action?
Please clarify!
- (1) we want to destroy Intersango exchange
- (2) we want to ruin Core credit finnancially
- (3) we want to destroy the reputation of Zhoutong, Tihan, Donald, Patrick and Amir and turn them into "persona non grata"
- (4) we want to destroy the economical existence of above mentioned people
- (5) we want to force those folks to collaborate with the police to chase the hacker(s) and put them in jail
- (6) we want to construct a case of precedence, so that in future no 17-year old entrepreneur without proper business education and governmental approvement can start a hightly profitable business.
- (7) we want to get our money back
We want to make it clear we won't stand for the business owners to steal from us, directly or indirectly?
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
Amen brother..
July 15, 2012, 10:20:54 PM
What exactly shall be the goal to be reached by legal action?
Please clarify!
- (1) we want to destroy Intersango exchange
- (2) we want to ruin Core credit finnancially
- (3) we want to destroy the reputation of Zhoutong, Tihan, Donald, Patrick and Amir and turn them into "persona non grata"
- (4) we want to destroy the economical existence of above mentioned people
- (5) we want to force those folks to collaborate with the police to chase the hacker(s) and put them in jail
- (6) we want to construct a case of precedence, so that in future no 17-year old entrepreneur without proper business education and governmental approvement can start a hightly profitable business.
- (7) we want to get our money back
We want to make it clear we won't stand for the business owners to steal from us, directly or indirectly?
How many of these cons do you want the community to endure before we take a stand? The money is already gone -make those responsible for losing it pay.
July 15, 2012, 10:18:47 PM
What exactly shall be the goal to be reached by legal action?
Please clarify!
- (1) we want to destroy Intersango exchange
- (2) we want to ruin Core credit finnancially
- (3) we want to destroy the reputation of Zhoutong, Tihan, Donald, Patrick and Amir and turn them into "persona non grata"
- (4) we want to destroy the economical existence of above mentioned people
- (5) we want to force those folks to collaborate with the police to chase the hacker(s) and put them in jail
- (6) we want to construct a case of precedence, so that in future no 17-year old entrepreneur without proper business education and governmental approvement can start a hightly profitable business.
- (7) we want to get our money back
Just decide on what the real goal should be.
Then decide what strategy could lead us to that goal,
and if it is feasible and likely to reach that goal.
Plesase, folks, really do that, instead of
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
guessing
...one hundred further pages in this forum....
July 15, 2012, 10:07:37 PM
You need at least 3 elements for a class/representative action. A court to certify that there's a cause of action; a court to certify the plaintiffs as a class (you need a minimum number of plaintiffs for this); and a defendant with deep enough pockets to pay the award being sought. In this particular instance, you're also going to need a court to accept jurisdiction. You will need to hire local litigation lawyers in each jurisdiction where an action is bring brought and you will need a means of funding that litigation.
[...]
[...]
One of the few rational posts in this thread.
Only lawyers will win. Everyone simply lose.
This. I find it astonishing that anyone who has balances with Bitcoinica would even consider litigation as an option. There isn't a capable firm in any of the potential jurisdictions that will take a case like this on a contingency basis. Can you say "retainers"? Talk about throwing good money after bad.
July 15, 2012, 08:46:00 PM
As an observer, seems to me that Zhou Tong bears most of the responsibility for hacking together and making available that miserable contraption, without much regard for security...
Amir & Co. just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and didn't back out, or take Bitcoinica offline and fix it, when it was wisest to do so.
Amir & Co. just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and didn't back out, or take Bitcoinica offline and fix it, when it was wisest to do so.
The first hack was caused directly by negligence, because a server that was open to some members of the public was given access to Patrick's private mail server. My understanding if I recall correctly is that this oversight/error was caused by genjix.
The second hack was either caused by the hacker pwning genjix's box and releasing the source under his name, OR genjix releasing the source himself without first scrubbing out stored passwords/API keys.
The second hack was either caused by the hacker pwning genjix's box and releasing the source under his name, OR genjix releasing the source himself without first scrubbing out stored passwords/API keys.
Thats correct, as far as we got informed.
But please put it back into context.
- Patricks mailserver became the weak spot, because it was common practice in the existing Bitcoinica team to send root password reset mails to a mailing list; and it was possible to add further addresses just as one sees fit.
- the second hacker could only extract sensible access information from the source code, because it was in there (where it doesn't belong), and because someone used the API username as password in the central password exchange service, and someone else failed to consolidate the password management
Hey, you guys should really try to come back to a rational assessment of facts. You're absolutely turned on into witch hunt mode.
Not that I approve what happened, but all I can see is about 6 folks working on the typical average level of (dis)organisation you find in every everyday's office. We all know that this isn't sufficient for securing a money processing system, but we also all know that the only way to get average people to work more reliably is to install procedures - procedures - procedures and yet more procedures.
Just that kind of stuff everyone is quick to blame as "red tape" and "dinosaur economy"
If the goal is to start legal action, you guys should learn first to switch off all personal emotions, and put together a list of objective failures, which can be proven to have led to causing the bitcoinica customers the finnancial losses we're suffering.
We need facts and proves, not guesses, "conspiracy smells" and "impressions".
July 15, 2012, 06:23:38 PM
As an observer, seems to me that Zhou Tong bears most of the responsibility for hacking together and making available that miserable contraption, without much regard for security...
Amir & Co. just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and didn't back out, or take Bitcoinica offline and fix it, when it was wisest to do so.
The first hack was caused directly by negligence, because a server that was open to some members of the public was given access to Patrick's private mail server. My understanding if I recall correctly is that this oversight/error was caused by genjix.Amir & Co. just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and didn't back out, or take Bitcoinica offline and fix it, when it was wisest to do so.
The second hack was either caused by the hacker pwning genjix's box and releasing the source under his name, OR genjix releasing the source himself without first scrubbing out stored passwords/API keys.
Take that for what it's worth.
July 15, 2012, 03:18:49 PM
From what I read on this forum, genjix was already paying back the funds. He did pause this process because of the recent theft. As Patrick is now apparently gone, genjix should be able to pay back even faster. I think you guys starting to sue him will actually prevent this. Now we all will have to wait longer, if we ever receive anything. So suing now was most probably not the smartest move.
Amir has stated all along that the refund process was being handled by Patrick and Donald and that he had little to do with it. Patrick also openly said on here that people were dependent on him to get their money. Amir says that Patrick has now "walked away" but nobody is certain whether that means he's walked away from handling the claims process or whether he's walked away from Bitcoinica altogether.
It's not fair to Amir to say that he should be able to pay back even faster when we know he had little involvement in the claims process before and that Donald was one of the people who delayed the initial refunds. It's not like Amir is now the only one in control of Bitcoinica records and funds and can do whatever the hell he wants. Whoever assumes responsibility for the refund process now is taking a huge legal risk. The Intersango guys are not accountants or auditors, and they probably shouldn't even attempt to continue handling the refund process themselves at this point.
a huge +1
July 15, 2012, 03:12:19 PM
From what I read on this forum, genjix was already paying back the funds. He did pause this process because of the recent theft. As Patrick is now apparently gone, genjix should be able to pay back even faster. I think you guys starting to sue him will actually prevent this. Now we all will have to wait longer, if we ever receive anything. So suing now was most probably not the smartest move.
Amir has stated all along that the refund process was being handled by Patrick and Donald and that he had little to do with it. Patrick also openly said on here that people were dependent on him to get their money. Amir says that Patrick has now "walked away" but nobody is certain whether that means he's walked away from handling the claims process or whether he's walked away from Bitcoinica altogether.
It's not fair to Amir to say that he should be able to pay back even faster when we know he had little involvement in the claims process before and that Donald was one of the people who delayed the initial refunds. It's not like Amir is now the only one in control of Bitcoinica records and funds and can do whatever the hell he wants. Whoever assumes responsibility for the refund process now is taking a huge legal risk. The Intersango guys are not accountants or auditors, and they probably shouldn't even attempt to continue handling the refund process themselves at this point.
July 15, 2012, 03:03:46 PM
Zhou Tong, can you check your github private repo if it was indeed genjix who cloned it on May 31, or there isn't a log that you can get that info from?
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
It seems Zhou heard the same, instead of checking logs:
Quote from: zhoutong
Agreed. But one of the team members explicitly released the source code and that caused the hacker to correctly guess LastPass account. (At least this is the most "right" version of the story I've heard.)
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4242713
July 15, 2012, 02:52:39 PM
I am more interested in having people who are victim of this made whole so that we can fucking move on and get on the business of building the bitcoin economy.
The best thing for the investors to do is to get someone start processing claim and refunding everyone as quick as possible. As soon somebody got paid(doesn't matter who!), the better.
The fact that nobody from bitcoinica is even talking is beyond stupid.
The best thing for the investors to do is to get someone start processing claim and refunding everyone as quick as possible. As soon somebody got paid(doesn't matter who!), the better.
The fact that nobody from bitcoinica is even talking is beyond stupid.
July 15, 2012, 02:49:51 PM
From what I read on this forum, genjix was already paying back the funds. He did pause this process because of the recent theft. As Patrick is now apparently gone, genjix should be able to pay back even faster. I think you guys starting to sue him will actually prevent this. Now we all will have to wait longer, if we ever receive anything. So suing now was most probably not the smartest move.
I would like a reference, if I may ask. I must have missed this. I do not want to contact Genjix directly, as now that we're evaluating legal action it might not be advisable. 
July 15, 2012, 02:47:41 PM
At this early stage, lawsuits will have a chilling effect on trying to bring new people into the community, especially new businesses.
Jeff, I disagree completely. There have been plenty of cases in the past where bitcoins were stolen or deposits unrefunded, yet I am unaware of a single attempt to fix this. How can an attempt to resolve this issue discourage people from using Bitcoin?If not, then this so called "community" has already set a giant precedent that it can be ripped off any way that works, and all it will do is just crawl away to be ripped off the next time...
IMHO, MyBitcoin is who did the most chilling and damage to Bitcoin, and the latter still survived.
I agree that Amir and Co. did a great deal for "the community", and got slammed by Murphy's Law, or whatever it's called in English. (In Russia, we call it the Law of the Sandwich.
) As an observer, seems to me that Zhou Tong bears most of the responsibility for hacking together and making available that miserable contraption, without much regard for security...
Amir & Co. just got caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, and didn't back out, or take Bitcoinica offline and fix it, when it was wisest to do so.
It's hard to do the best thing in such complex circumstances...
Nevertheless, seems the only way for them to clear their name completely is to go through an external law suit, which will involve a police investigation.
July 15, 2012, 02:31:37 PM
Zhou Tong, can you check your github private repo if it was indeed genjix who cloned it on May 31, or there isn't a log that you can get that info from?
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
^this I'd like to know as well.
It may help the ones that pursuit litigation on finding the person who was responsible for the last theft.
July 15, 2012, 02:25:33 PM
Zhou Tong, can you check your github private repo if it was indeed genjix who cloned it on May 31, or there isn't a log that you can get that info from?
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
I'm assuming there is an access log because it's a private repo, but I may be wrong, ofcourse.
^this I'd like to know as well.
Jump to: