Topic: CoinLab suing MtGox for $75 milliion? - page 2. (Read 19439 times)

This is just plain wrong. Besides, Europe is 30+ countries, each of them are have their own bylaws and jurisdictions.

If by any chance you were referring to the BTC24 fiasco, it wasn't the push of a button but a federal prosecutor asking for international cooperation on a criminal matter. Go there, read the statements, see for yourself, and learn.

OTOH, yes I agress that even in Europe, this shit could happen. It's just, as a rule of thumb, that it is less easy, IMHO, to cover everything up under the seal of secrecy, invoking higher national interests, terrorists, and that kind of BS.

from the source I read they all went along the Mutum Sigillum’s Dwolla account (a.k.a. Mt. Gox) line

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/feds-seize-money-from-top-bitcoin-exchange-mt-gox/


"The Department of Homeland Security and US District Court for the District of Maryland issued a ‘Seizure Warrant’ for the funds associated with Mutum Sigillum’s Dwolla account (a.k.a. Mt. Gox)," a Dwolla spokesperson told NYO's BetaBeat. "Dwolla has ceased all account activities... for Mutum Sigillum while Dwolla’s holding partner transferred Mutum Sigillum’s balance, per the warrant."

They could intervene if they're affected in some way, such as having a claim to some or all of the money in the account.  I have no idea what Mutum Sigilum LLC is other than a Delaware corporation that has been associated with Gox and apparently processes payments for it.

In Europe, which prides itself for its liberty and democracy, accounts are closed across borders as simple as pushing a button.
Lets not kid ourselves, once a certain "threat level" is reached or big brother asks for a favor, every country throws their principles overboard.

I am also having a very hard time believing in the cluelessness of MtGox, they are somehow always involved, but are the last to learn about it.

In dictatorships, like the Democratic Republic of the USA, the government can seize any bank account any time.  They have secret laws, and special government departments  can issue secret gag orders which are called "National Security Letter" in the "Land of the free".  Japan is a democracy.  Not as easy for foreign governments to seize money there.

No account belonging to MtGox has been seized or frozen.  The accounts in question belong to Mutum Sigillum LLC, an US payment provider which MtGox uses.  We do not know why Mutum Sigillum LLC were targeted.  MtGox is affected, but I doubt they would ever get invited to court to defend another company.

The point was it is relatively easy to freeze some ones account, you thought not, it has happened, you do not deny but acknowledge that point. You do appear to minimize the fact of what has happened. A few quotes ago, you were full of sound and furry should any one touch your account at the bank, and how it would never happen if you were not there. QED on that.

Nether do you now deny your second error (quite large) that you though some how GOX's lawyers were in a court fighting this, yet GOX themselves knew nothing about it and they publicly said so. That's just basic research of the facts and understanding of what happened.

Further you don't appear to understand the separation of powers doctrine. The Govt is as private person or commercial entity in-front of the court when it comes to seizure of funds, freezing accounts. Sure they have a few more statues here and their but they still have to go before a court like anyone else. Here is a good example of separation of powers

"The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail—its roof may shake—the wind may blow through it—the storm may enter—the rain may enter—but the King of England cannot enter—all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement." So be it—unless he has justification by law.

    Southam v Smout [1964] 1 QB 308 at 320



As I explained before Coin labs may face a hard time, due to normal trade considerations made before injuncnting them, and it could be sort of shooting themselves in the foot, but this may give another limb to go after funds, though they will have to consider that such an attack may lead to gov confiscation. CoinLabs also have to conisder would you rather let them trade so they have money to pay. However countering that is the question of who will get priority to any funds so should they leap in. This was not my point here, but you seem to be averting to it, as cover for your capitulation and error.

Please do continue you are most fine sport.

I've seen this claim made elsewhere but didn't think to ask for information at the time.

What information is available for them actively obstructing the contract?

While I'm not going to endorse Coinlab, the lawsuit does not appear to be frivolous.  Gox contracted to do something and they didn't do it.  In fact, they're actively obstructing carrying it out.  While I don't know why they chose to renege on the contract, and they may have had good reason, that's what a breach of contract suit is for.  The $50 million liquidated damages clause is somewhat dodgy, but the suit itself (if the facts are actually as claimed) is legitimate.

Also, the Dwolla thing appears to be the DHS' doing, not Coinlab's.  They just don't have the clout to engineer something like that.

And yet you're still wrong! :lol:

You are clearly confusing a private lawsuit with the government here. Coinlab has not had the funds frozen. The US Government stepped in and for whatever reason took action against Dwolla re: gox. Obviously the government will have a much easier time doing things like this than a private citizen - duh!


I'm sure coinlab's lawyers don't need to "watch with interest" to see how to conduct a lawsuit. "Oh they got an order against a company mtgox works with to stop doing business with them? Damn, we should try something like that!" :lol:

If anything every minute that goes by makes you look more foolish since apparently it is "so easy" to freeze funds and now that coinlab's lawyers are apparently "watching with interest" to see how "it is not a large step to see how this could happen to gox". If it's so quick and easy, why hasn't coinlab tried to freeze gox's funding yet? Surely putting their nuts in a vice could help force them to the bargaining table....

:lol:

Note that it wasn't MtGox's accounts which were frozen.  The accounts belong to Mutum Sigillum LLC, their payment provider.  There has been no word from them about their involvement.  Probably got a national security letter with a gag order.  This is "Land of the Free" after all, not Soviet Russia.

It is unlikely that MtGox had much money there.  From IRC a while ago:

Your a riot, the two quotes were merely to condense what you said,

My point was that it is easy to freeze funds, and you thought not!

Also there were no lawyers for Gox in any Court Room because Gox made the public announcement it was not even aware that it had happened until after it had happened!!!!

The embarrassment good sir is all yours.

nor did I link the action to coins labs.

I also never said business would stop, if some funds are frozen. However, accounts are stopped. It is not a large step to see how this could happen to Gox in JP, In fact I am sure coin labs lawyers are watching with interest.

Coinlab looks all-around dodgy to me. First they change their business model 3 times, then they sneak their way into the Bitcoin Foundation. Next they try to sneakily acquire all of Gox's USA customers (since the have zero credibility in the crypto community), and finally they file a frivolous lawsuit that appears to have the weight of DHS/Feds behind it?  4 strikes and you're out...

On the other hand, I definitely wouldn't place too much faith and/or capital into Gox right now...

I'm not sure why it took you two separate messages to reply to the same message... :lol:

Although you've already embarrassed yourself enough let me clear things up for you: this would appear to have NOTHING to do with the coinlab lawsuit:

1) The Department of Homeland Security does *NOT* go around enforcing private civil lawsuits.

2) Coinlab filed their lawsuit in Washington State. The Dwolla court order came from Maryland which is on the exact opposite side of the country.

3) There is nothing saying Mt Gox didn't know about this as you claim. Just because it happened doesn't mean they didn't have lawyers in a courtroom in Maryland arguing against it.

4)  Mt. Gox's business has not been stopped. All that has happened is a completely separate company was given a court order telling them that they were not allowed to continue to process business for Mt Gox.

You need to stop watching so much "Law and Order"  

Valid Point.

I think that we need
1) More entries into the marketplace (more exchanges).
2) More competition.
3) I don't know that its preferable for US customers should be dealing with a japanese based exchange, the japanese laws are not setup to protect american consumers, businesses, investors, etc. We need exchanges at home (note that I've lived in japan for around 6 months in the past).

Obviously the solution is difficult, but I do believe in capitalism, so let profit motivate, hopefully more than just coinlab's to get into the US market now that the bumbling giant is been hit with a stone.

But do you feel a slightly bumbling incumbent is better than a ruthless and financially motivated newcomer or the other way around?

I'd be fine with Coinlab taking over. It sounds like they were suppose to anyways. MtGox has not been doing the best job AT ALL.

Thanks - I will read your post. But also, if they have the technology ready, they could just start a second company and start operating an exchange. Nothing stops them from that.

The contract between MtGox and Coinlab only had signatures from 2 people, and Mark even signed as a witness. I don't know, but should not a witness usually be a person not being part of the contract ? Could it be grounds for making the contract void ? What if the contract was made under some kind of pressure, could not also that make it void ?

Because they're subject to the same gigantic $50 million liquidated damages clause that they're using to sue Gox. 

While I've written a more detailed article with legal reasoning on that issue as to why I think that contractual term is a literal paper tiger, considering that CoinLab is depending on that clause in their own arguments, it would be foolish to go violate it themselves.

They also don't have the Gox technology, such as it is, to deploy anything.  While I don't see that preventing them from working on implementing after the litigation is resolved, they probably can't just go ahead and do it, at least not without risking losing their $50 million lottery ticket against Gox.

*ahem*

How wrong could you be. I think you need some real theoretical training and real world legal experience in getting injunctions, freezing bank accounts and international law and how to pursue matters. Something Drastic has happened overnight without even the Knowledge of Mt. Gox ie. ex-parte (it remais to be seen if  Coin labs was involved, but you can do this)

Next up will be the freezing of gox funds in Japan, by the treaty and or agreed US jurisdiction.