Topic: Is it stealing when you get the funds from an address you find? (Read 6771 times)

My guess is that it is obviously stealing in the case A, because the question is like, when I get the key from one's house and take the money from out there is it stealing? Yes, it is. Case B is not that easy. You might have recieved the money accidentally and then it would be better to return it. But somebody might have wanted to surprise you and send you money or it was a robot giving random tips for some actions. Case B is half-stealing, I think.

No. War is actually a form of state sanctioned killing, as long as it falls within Geneva Conventions.
So war is not murder under the legal understanding. The question I was asking was in a world where
killing is acceptable on a daily basis, such as for parking spots and job promotions. My point was that
the bitcoin blockchain is not only a "trustless, program requiring no morality, and etc"., but legally it is
something much more. The Bitcoin blockchain is its own world with rules that are contradictory to our
current view of the world and its systems, and this is why the governments currently can not regulate it.
Theft, conspiracy, collusion, manipulation, and etc are illegal in normal regulated financial systems, but
in Bitcoin it is what allows it to function.




Bitcoin does not grant any users any legal rights or guarantees of or in the Bitcoin system.
Bitcoin has no central authority to determine ownership or rightful possession of any bitcoins.
The whole system is voluntary and only functions due to its ability to not conform to established laws.

Theft from a legal view is determined when a type of property is wrongfully or illegally taken by another.
In the bitcoin system, since no rights exist or are granted, theft does not exist except as a valid system
of conveyance of bitcoins. For example, the Bitcoin blockchain does not care who has stolen them, neither
do the devs or miners, and that the only users who do care are the legally regulated exchanges that will freeze
the stolen coins if they are deposited within their site since they are required to conform to money laws and rules.
If the coins never enter the exchanges, the thief will be allowed by the blockchain to continue its control and
movement of those coins. The bitcoin blockchain will not freeze those coins or make judgements of those coins.

Since Bitcoin itself is currently unregulated, theft is fully allowable, considered a realistic possibility, and ultimately
is considered acceptable when it occurs. If you pay attention to the forum posts of when actual coins are stolen from
someone, most of the responses to that user is that it was due to their own actions and not due to the thief breaking
some sort of code or rule or law. The user who lost their coins has no form of recourse or appeal to the system itself.

Because of all the foregoing and other undiscussd issues, bitcoin users actually do not legally own any bitcoins.
They have no rights to the coins or the system and most governments do not grant any rights or protections to it.
So "stealing" is really only a moral question and not a legal question with Bitcoin, and the OPs post was a legal question
in Legal section of this forum.

I am not trying to justify theft, I'm just explaining why I think certain legal standards may not exist in Bitcoin.
If a day comes when those standards are applied to Bitcoin within the network itself, Bitcoin is dead and over.

We don't need to be in another dimension: we call this war, and we do it every day, right here in this dimension for as long as recorded history. It doesn't make it ok, it simply makes it: the way things are.

The OP had a question, I stated my opinion, you disagreed with me and called me ignorant < that's your opinion and you are free to it ;-) keep it; it's probably "the truth".

But this is not:
"The majority of the Bitcoin Network is designed and functions on amoral behavior."

The network was meant to function without trust, it is a program, it requires no morality. We are not questioning the morality of the program.
It was a question posed by a person regarding an action they would carry out.

This isn't Plato's Republic, it's bitcoin talk.
And the question isn't a complicated moral conundrum.
Is it stealing? Yes. However which friggen way you would want to justify it.

but here the case is a little different, it is right that you will not take the cash but if some one accidentally got fund then it is his moral duty to return it and if he is not returning it then it will be stealing, 

I was not trying to be rude, if I came off as such.

To clarify myself, can stealing truly exist in an purposefully created amoral system?
For a wacky example, assume in another dimension, humans can kill other humans for a form
of advancement and that is socially acceptable and the rules and laws in this dimension, now
the question is: can a person commit murder in this place?
I don't think so and I think the OPs question about stealing is like this example.
(But in our world it is murder, and outside the Bitcoin blockchain, it is theft.)

Ok

I guess the number one is clear stealing legally and ethically, Number two is a grey zone but I still guess it's stealing, However being able to track down someone using these methods is almost impossible, letting alone prosecuting them under the law almost anywhere in the world.

Depends on which country it happen. If it happened in the country where ownership of bitcoin is not honored then, even it is morally wrong, it is not a theft.  But if it happen to the country that impose a law and honor the ownership of bitcoin as asset or whatever, then it is stealing.  I think it is simple as that.  Morality is out of concept in bitcoin protocol.  Besides Government had already defeated the meaning of morality.

Morality is irrelevant.
The majority of the Bitcoin Network is designed and functions on amoral behavior.
You seem to be pretty ignorant of this based on your response.

the case first i s totally a bug example of stealing but in the case second if you got the adress that is the same which is used by another then i will suggest you to leave that wallet because it may be possible that you deposit some amount of btc at that adress then the second person withdraw your btc then you will get loss , so never make things that is bad for someone .

I didn't even need to read your entire post.
Are you actually this "fundamentally" morally bankrupt?
If they were yours, and someone "found them", and didn't give them back: would that be stealing? Yes.

it is a case of morality,if you find some cash while you are walking down the aisle, would you take it ? ,i certainly will not ,but  here you are doing this on purpose and still claiming to be an innocent act and i wonder what your age is having these sort of doubts

if you found the fun accidentally then it is not stealing if you found intentionally using some source then it is really stealing and it is morally and lawfully not good.

Well - it's not stealing in Germany and in Japan. That much I know now.

Rico

if you got some fund from an unknown address accidentally its ok you not stolen the fund but you are going returning it from where you got then it is really stealing.

yes i also agree with you that if you know about the person or address from where you get the balance ans still you are not returning it to him then it is really stealing, but if you do not know abut the address then it is not stealing.

yes if you know the person or the address from where you get the fund then it is really stealing but if yo do  not know the person then it is not stealing but you have to not use it tell some time and if the owner not fount then you can use it.

yes in fact it is stealing because you can return the bitcoin to the address from which you have receive accidentally and if you are not doing so then you are real doing wrong.

yes i think also that it is stealing, because you can return the fund easily to one who sent you accidentally and if you are not doing so, then its mean that you are really stealing the fund..

no i do not think that it is stealing.