Topic: Is stealing Bitcoins illegal? (Read 24258 times)
it is illegal to steal Bitcoins no matter how you do it. just think how distressed you will be if you get robbed.
If I somehow gain unauthorized access to your wallet.dat, I can be arrested for computer crimes.
But suppose I somehow deceive you into transferring the coins to me yourself.
In the eyes of the law, have I committed a crime?
Personally I think that in most countries, if you reported it to the police, there is nothing they could do. However I am not a lawyer so I am interested to hear what some of the more legally knowledgeable people here think.
I know of one country where I think it would be a crime. South Korea has a "virtual crime" unit, and presumably virtual crime laws. This was set up to prosecute people who steal items and in-game currency in MMORPGs and similar games and I believe that many cases have come to court, although it's not regarded as a particularly serious crime.
There are also two countries where it may be a crime. In Japan a young man was arrested for "virtual mugging" in a game called Lineage 2. A Dutch teenager was also arrested for stealing virtual furniture in a visual chat environment called Habbo Hotel. However I can't find any information as to whether either of these arrests lead to prosecution and conviction. After the Dutch arrest a spokesperson for the company which developed Habbo Hotel said "It is theft because the items were bought with real money." So perhaps in Holland it is only illegal to steal coins which have been purchased and not mined.
What do you all think?
But suppose I somehow deceive you into transferring the coins to me yourself.
In the eyes of the law, have I committed a crime?
Personally I think that in most countries, if you reported it to the police, there is nothing they could do. However I am not a lawyer so I am interested to hear what some of the more legally knowledgeable people here think.
I know of one country where I think it would be a crime. South Korea has a "virtual crime" unit, and presumably virtual crime laws. This was set up to prosecute people who steal items and in-game currency in MMORPGs and similar games and I believe that many cases have come to court, although it's not regarded as a particularly serious crime.
There are also two countries where it may be a crime. In Japan a young man was arrested for "virtual mugging" in a game called Lineage 2. A Dutch teenager was also arrested for stealing virtual furniture in a visual chat environment called Habbo Hotel. However I can't find any information as to whether either of these arrests lead to prosecution and conviction. After the Dutch arrest a spokesperson for the company which developed Habbo Hotel said "It is theft because the items were bought with real money." So perhaps in Holland it is only illegal to steal coins which have been purchased and not mined.
What do you all think?
i'd say if anyone ever stole any kind of "coins" from me(welcome to vegas) i'd want them back or i'd go looking for them!...common law,,
Although it may not be qualified as theft by criminal law of most states, I think it is still possible to enforce reimbursement of the value of stolen Bitcoins with civil lawsuit.
Ahh old topic, well no it's not illegal.
Stealing should be a moral concern, not about illegality.
I am curious though, how does this bit make sense?
From my understanding of christian mythology, "god's laws" would bind believer and unbeliever alike and you're the first christian i've come across to imply otherwise.
Correction: he's the first Christian to explicitly say that. Most fundamentalist Christians I've come across imply it all the time, especially in their attitude toward non-Christians. (And the Lord said "Thou shalt not kill, unless thy enemy is a heathen, in which case thou maist blow him into tiny bits." Here endeth the lesson.) Quote
Whereas, those who have faith in Jesus Christ, are not under the law, or may not be under the law.
From my understanding of christian mythology, "god's laws" would bind believer and unbeliever alike and you're the first christian i've come across to imply otherwise.
I think Gods laws say 'you shall not steal'.
People who do not believe in God, may think they are not under Gods laws, but in fact, according to some interpretations of the holy bible, their non-belief means that they are under Gods laws, though they do not think they are.
Whereas, those who have faith in Jesus Christ, are not under the law, or may not be under the law.
To the non-believer, they may find this hard to understand.
Stealing is always against Gods laws.
Specific states or governments or kings or queens in various locations may not have created specific laws at times; but people who do evil are having impunity. Just because a state or government did not create a specific law, does not mean it is not against the law to steal.
But judgments may deviate depending on many different factors. Some lawyers might cling to the fact that the state failed to create any specific laws for a matter, and might win, I think this is possible but I don't really know.
But Gods laws are always that you shall not steal. To be on the safe side, don't steal.
Basic ethics is all that's needed to understand stealing is wrong, no god or religion is needed, nor is a state needed.
The question asked by the OP was "Is stealing bitcoins illegal?" which was pretty clearly a reference to secular laws passed by the state, it should be painfully obvious that stealing is against any civilised person's ethics and against most religious laws.
I am curious though, how does this bit make sense?
Quote
Whereas, those who have faith in Jesus Christ, are not under the law, or may not be under the law.
From my understanding of christian mythology, "god's laws" would bind believer and unbeliever alike and you're the first christian i've come across to imply otherwise.
I think Gods laws say 'you shall not steal'.
People who do not believe in God, may think they are not under Gods laws, but in fact, according to some interpretations of the holy bible, their non-belief means that they are under Gods laws, though they do not think they are.
Whereas, those who have faith in Jesus Christ, are not under the law, or may not be under the law.
To the non-believer, they may find this hard to understand.
Stealing is always against Gods laws.
Specific states or governments or kings or queens in various locations may not have created specific laws at times; but people who do evil are having impunity. Just because a state or government did not create a specific law, does not mean it is not against the law to steal.
But judgments may deviate depending on many different factors. Some lawyers might cling to the fact that the state failed to create any specific laws for a matter, and might win, I think this is possible but I don't really know.
But Gods laws are always that you shall not steal. To be on the safe side, don't steal.
Of course stealing bitcoins is illegal.
Taking something that does not belong to you by force or by fraud is one of the things governments were put in place to stop.
Taking something that does not belong to you by force or by fraud is one of the things governments were put in place to stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obtaining_pecuniary_advantage_by_deception
What he said. Anyone stealing Bitcoins from a Brit should and will be beaten with the arm of the UK Law.
Of course stealing bitcoins is illegal.
Taking something that does not belong to you by force or by fraud is one of the things governments were put in place to stop.
Taking something that does not belong to you by force or by fraud is one of the things governments were put in place to stop.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obtaining_pecuniary_advantage_by_deception
Numbers are pretty fascinating .. not likely to happen before the death of this universe..
That kinda puts things in perspective. Thats ahh pretty amazing.
The chances are actually quite a bit higher than that. Those perfect odds depends on creating perfectly random numbers. We all know that no software is that perfect. And include brainwallets and you've already narrowed it down quite a bit more.That kinda puts things in perspective. Thats ahh pretty amazing.
I think this whole discussion about stealing bitcoins is missing the fact that moving bitcoins is never stealing.
These are my arguments:
First:
The Blockchain and Bitcoin-protocol don't have an end-user license agreement, and the original inventor is not there to defend it. And it has been called an experiment many times. So basically you can use it any way you like. It has been said many times over: "Only invest time/money into Bitcoin you can afford to lose".
Second:
The entire premise of Bitcoin is to get away from trust in central authority deciding who own the money. Bitcoin even has the much adopted tag-line "In cryptography we trust" - So as long as you are following the mathematical rules, you are not stealing anything.
As Sathoshi has once said: "The owner of a coin is just whoever has its private key."
(E-mail from Satoshi: http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/bitcoin-satoshi/email-p2presearch-2009-02-12-141802.txt)
Third:
(my personal opinion which doesn't match intellectual property laws)
Private keys can't be stolen. Imagine your car gets stolen, but it's still there in the morning
But even with intellectual property, laws differ in various countries on how to prove it was your right before anybody elses.
Numbers are pretty fascinating .. not likely to happen before the death of this universe..
That kinda puts things in perspective. Thats ahh pretty amazing.
That kinda puts things in perspective. Thats ahh pretty amazing.
i only read just read " creating tons of adresses" and i'm not a mathmatician but .. is that one in two to the power of one hundred and sixty?
Yes. Or 1 in 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 if you prefer. 
(Actually, it's
i only read just read " creating tons of adresses" and i'm not a mathmatician but .. is that one in two to the power of one hundred and sixty?
and you creating a response that would be irritating 
What about this: I generate a new address and it turns out it already has coins in it. Would sending those coins to another address be illegal?
What are the odds of the happening ?
What about this: I generate a new address and it turns out it already has coins in it. Would sending those coins to another address be illegal?
What are the odds of that happening ?
Yeh it -was - a really dumb question. . The guy bangs 2 bricks together and thinks he's inventing fire. .
. . . Now have a look at the name of the thread
Now please have a think about whether this thread is about the morality of stealing, or whether it is discussing a legal issue . . .
It was a pretty dumb question to start with.Now please have a think about whether this thread is about the morality of stealing, or whether it is discussing a legal issue . . .
"Stealing" is the taking of another's property without legal right. It is therefore illegal.
Now, if we are talking about providing the necessary bitcoin scripts to satisfy the requirements of a previous transaction output creating a situation where another person who thought they were the only one capable of providing those scripts can no longer do so and you still can for future transfer of control of the output . . .
Well, then that may or may not be illegal. But if it is not illegal, then it is not stealing in which case you are no longer discussing whether "stealing" bitcoins is illegal. You are instead discussing whether some other non-stealing process is illegal.
Which brings us back to the original question: "Is stealing Bitcoins illegal?"
And back to the simple answer. If there is an action that the judicial system decides to recognize as "stealing" bitcoins (or bitcoin "theft"), and you perform that action, then what you have done is illegal. Any other action that is determined not to be an act of "theft" or "stealing" may or may not be illegal, but also isn't part of a discussion about whether or not "stealing" is illegal.
As for whether any court has ever (or will ever) recognize any particular actions as bitcoin theft. As far as I know, there has not been such a case tested in court. As such it is quite difficult to know how any courts will act when presented with an opportunity to set a new precedent. It will probably depend a lot on the specific facts of the case, and perhaps even more importantly the skill of the lawyers and the attitude of the particular judges deciding the case.
Jump to: