Topic: Cryptopia Judge: "1. Crypto is property 2. Even w/o keys, crypto remains yours" - page 3. (Read 1212 times)

Thanks for fleshing it out.
What happens next?

Heh. What I quoted ^ is the only thing he actually posted. Since my quote, he has edited his post and added everything else afterwards.

Back on topic, however, you do not seem to understand the consequences of this judgment. In the case of "not your keys, not your coin", this would mean that the coins on the exchange would be used to fill the debts caused by the exchange's bankruptcy. Quod non.

Thanks to this judgment, this will not be the case, since the judge is separating these completely from the exchange's activa.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Criminal Law (e.g. theft), but this is Insolvency Law (e.g. bankruptcy).

I really don't see how I could explain this more clearly.

  He may not express it well but he understands bitcoin better than this judge person. It's a new paradigm and the kiwis need to catch up.

Not your keys, not your coin. Not that hard.

Thanks for reminding me about the existence of the Ivory Tower. My mistake.

Yes, crypto is a property. Is an asset and almost every country see a property as an asset including cryptocurrency too and is protected against an intruder through wallet, phrases or other security codes just like a fence is erected on a land against other people to freely have access

But on the other extent where you mention exchange to protect also the cryptocurrency, I think the laws are not too much available in all the countries to ensure that scam, losses from exchanges are going to be accounted for. Therefore, for me on exchanges if I can keep my coins in my private wallet, I think I would prefer that, for the security of my property  

About a month ago, a judgment was pronounced in the context of the Cryptopia bankruptcy case.

Imho, this judgment is a landmark decision for crypto, which is - as you all know - a relatively new kind of 'property', about which until now, very few rulings have been pronounced.

I am therefore a little bit astonished - to say the least, to find out that no-one has been posting anything about this. Like it or not, these kinds of seemingly unimportant details are in reality the essential triggers to turn crypto more and more into a commonly accepted good, so how is it even possible that this news was not picked up on these boards (correct me if I'm wrong)...

That being said:


In short, and in human language:

1. Cryptocurrencies are formally and undeniably recognized as property. The definition referred to in the judgment is this one (for those who don't know, I'd like to specify that this is New Zealand Law): "property means property of every kind whether tangible or intangible, real or personal, corporeal or incorporeal, and includes rights, interests, and claims of every kind in relation to property however they arise".

This gives you all the rights that are attached to it, meaning in a nutshell they're yours, you can do with it as you please, and no-one is allowed to take them from you without agreement from your side.

2. If you leave your cryptocurrencies on an exchange - regardless of the fact of (not) owning the private keys - they remain yours, and do not become the property of the exchange. This protects the owner against bankruptcy and also against theft / hacking (if the money can be found but that goes for any property, of course).

3. Little side note: NZ law and Australian Law are "quite" alike. If Australian judges decide to follow the same line of thought, this could open interesting perspectives for Nauticus Exchange - based in Australia - customers.

More info: http://cryptopia.co.nz/

Again: this is huge.