Topic: Gov. Brown signs bills legalizing Bitcoins use, other legislation - page 2. (Read 1820 times)
June 29, 2014, 08:49:49 PM
to da moon & its actually a good news combo
June 29, 2014, 08:36:13 PM
bitcoin was never truly illegal, but by formally making it usable in california can this law be used against banks that ban customers purely for using bitcoin, with no evidence of laundering/drugs or terrorism??
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
No. Banks are private property and they can close your account for any reason (other than a protected class i.e. race, religion, etc). Most banks include language functionally which indicates that either party (the bank or the account holder) can close the account for any reason or even without providing reason by giving 30 days notice. I have never seen anything which indicates this was successfully challenged in court. Banks routinely close accounts for all kinds of legal businesses that for risk management or other dubious reasons the bank does not want to be associated with.
Technically prior to the passage of this law one could argue that Bitcoin miners in CA were unlawful. It was never enforced, there was no indication anyone ever intended to enforce it, and the stupidly written law should never have passed without correction in the first place. Still as written the statute did make it unlawful to "issue or put into circulation" any currency other than the legal tender of the United States. It is a correction of a law that as far as I know has never been enforced against anyone, ever since it was (poorly) written.
In short the bill does absolutely nothing other than to prevent this never enforced, poorly written law from being enforced in the future.
This bill will help bitcoin broker to open a "legitimate company" in the state and never get banned by their banks.
June 29, 2014, 06:49:13 PM
bitcoin was never truly illegal, but by formally making it usable in california can this law be used against banks that ban customers purely for using bitcoin, with no evidence of laundering/drugs or terrorism??
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
In short the bill does absolutely nothing other than to prevent this never enforced, poorly written law from being enforced in the future.
Your other points are correct, but I disagree with this one. It does in fact do something. It reaffirms the Government's mistaken belief that citizens need Their permission to do anything. That you do not have permission to engage in any activity without Their expressed permission.
June 29, 2014, 06:07:48 PM
Finally. I was wondering when this thing was going to get signed. It seems like we've been waiting forever for them to change their very poorly written laws.
While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
well, this is a nice start to the bitcoin world progress, slowly but surely they will all start to accept bitcoin payments at them. no doubt, it will go according to plan bitcoin: DWhile this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
quite nice indeed, who better to server as bitcoin wingman than politicians who can recieve anonnymous donations in bitcoin for the campaigns.
some more news like this are about to hit the public, and speculators for sure, all we need is a starter to break the ice
June 29, 2014, 05:59:09 PM
Finally. I was wondering when this thing was going to get signed. It seems like we've been waiting forever for them to change their very poorly written laws.
While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
well, this is a nice start to the bitcoin world progress, slowly but surely they will all start to accept bitcoin payments at them. no doubt, it will go according to plan bitcoin: D While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
June 29, 2014, 04:37:26 PM
bitcoin was never truly illegal, but by formally making it usable in california can this law be used against banks that ban customers purely for using bitcoin, with no evidence of laundering/drugs or terrorism??
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
No. Banks are private property and they can close your account for any reason (other than a protected class i.e. race, religion, etc). Most banks include language functionally which indicates that either party (the bank or the account holder) can close the account for any reason or even without providing reason by giving 30 days notice. I have never seen anything which indicates this was successfully challenged in court. Banks routinely close accounts for all kinds of legal businesses that for risk management or other dubious reasons the bank does not want to be associated with.
Technically prior to the passage of this law one could argue that Bitcoin miners in CA were unlawful. It was never enforced, there was no indication anyone ever intended to enforce it, and the stupidly written law should never have passed without correction in the first place. Still as written the statute did make it unlawful to "issue or put into circulation" any currency other than the legal tender of the United States. It is a correction of a law that as far as I know has never been enforced against anyone, ever since it was (poorly) written.
In short the bill does absolutely nothing other than to prevent this never enforced, poorly written law from being enforced in the future.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
June 29, 2014, 04:32:13 PM
Finally. I was wondering when this thing was going to get signed. It seems like we've been waiting forever for them to change their very poorly written laws.
While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
I don't think this law has any real effect on the "legality" of bitcoin, although one could argue that it does provide clarification on using bitcoin. It should hopefully give some level of legitimacy to bitcoin in CA While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
June 29, 2014, 01:32:19 PM
. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
Not a rabid anarchist, but still someone who doesn't believe we need the .gov's permission to use BTC.Why does .gov need to get into in every aspect of your face, bedroom, life, etc (rhetorical question, no answer needed).
.35 cent per kwh is cheap compared to what we pay here - .45 cent per kwh!
Location: the banana republic of Hawaii....
Yeah, I think my statement there was a little over the top, haha. I agree with you.
45 cents ouch. They should hook up some geothermal power or something like they use in Iceland.
Yeah, highest rate in the nation, not conducive to profitable mining, for sure
.At least Moonbeam is on record for his BTC position - I give him credit for that.
June 29, 2014, 01:23:34 PM
Holy shit, this seems like huge news, I would never have thought I'd read something like this a couple years ago:
"AB 129 will allow Bitcoins and other digital currency to be legally used in transactions in California by repealing a provision of state law that bars the use of "anything but the lawful money of the United States.""
"AB 129 will allow Bitcoins and other digital currency to be legally used in transactions in California by repealing a provision of state law that bars the use of "anything but the lawful money of the United States.""
June 29, 2014, 01:08:40 PM
. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
Not a rabid anarchist, but still someone who doesn't believe we need the .gov's permission to use BTC.Why does .gov need to get into in every aspect of your face, bedroom, life, etc (rhetorical question, no answer needed).
.35 cent per kwh is cheap compared to what we pay here - .45 cent per kwh!
Location: the banana republic of Hawaii....
Yeah, I think my statement there was a little over the top, haha. I agree with you.
45 cents ouch. They should hook up some geothermal power or something like they use in Iceland.
bitcoin was never truly illegal, but by formally making it usable in california can this law be used against banks that ban customers purely for using bitcoin, with no evidence of laundering/drugs or terrorism??
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
meaning banks cant just ban joe public unless there is proof of illegal activities, no longer able to just shout "you use bitcoin, your banned"
. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
Not a rabid anarchist, but still someone who doesn't believe we need the .gov's permission to use BTC.Why does .gov need to get into in every aspect of your face, bedroom, life, etc (rhetorical question, no answer needed).
.35 cent per kwh is cheap compared to what we pay here - .45 cent per kwh!
Location: the banana republic of Hawaii....
Ouch, and I thought I was hurting here in Los Angeles. Trying so hard all the time not to crank the air conditioning in the summer.... DWP bills kill me. And bitcoin mining? Out of the question in this heat....
. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
Not a rabid anarchist, but still someone who doesn't believe we need the .gov's permission to use BTC.Why does .gov need to get into in every aspect of your face, bedroom, life, etc (rhetorical question, no answer needed).
.35 cent per kwh is cheap compared to what we pay here - .45 cent per kwh!
Location: the banana republic of Hawaii....
Yay, Moonbean!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Good. Now if only he could help bring down utility rates that are higher than most parts of Europe. $0.35c/KWh from non-green energy, really? Stupid CPUC.
Wow. Those are some insanely high energy prices. Guess there's not many people mining in Cali.
Yay, Moonbean!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Good. Now if only he could help bring down utility rates that are higher than most parts of Europe. $0.35c/KWh from non-green energy, really? Stupid CPUC.
Finally. I was wondering when this thing was going to get signed. It seems like we've been waiting forever for them to change their very poorly written laws.
While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
While this effectively changes nothing, since it's not like people were really prevented from actually using bitcoin, it does add some legitimacy to bitcoin overall. I don't think there is anything to complain about here. Unless you're some rabid anarchist who gets offended at the fact that the government would even begin to think they could tell you that you now have permission to use bitcoin.
I'm really glad they got that red-legged frog thing figure out!
Yay, Moonbean!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Even a broken clock is correct twice a day!
Jump to: