Topic: MtGox.regulation - not necessarily but the enforcement of contracts - definitely (Read 1062 times)

Good points about contracts vs. regulation. A hard fork would also be possible invalidating the BTC which were stolen. Common law holds that what you steal is not yours to give or sell.

Assuming the theft was large enough and the mixing extensive enough, this would interestingly have the effect of probably decreasing everyone's BTC by some small amount.

I would like to see the Bitcoin Foundation put a team to work tracing Gox wallets with a view to aiding further investigations.

The Bitcoin community is missing an opportunity with this whole MtGox fiasco.  Rather than letting the media spin us as hypocrites that want regulation now that we have suffered a loss, we need to use the opportunity to point out that what MtGox users had was an enforceable contract (money for services and the expectation of security).

This is our opportunity to point that money has been declared illegal (which is unconstitutional) and how much government fiat has added to this crisis.  Every user of MtGox went through rigorous government financial regulation to verify their account and had tolerated banking delays as the Federal Reserve scrutinized every fiat transaction in and out of MtGox.

This should entitle MtGox users not to any bailouts but to the investigative resources of the regulators.  The idea that they should get away with saying they are not responsible to investigate a crime simply because it did not involve the use of their illegal World Bank mobster Ducets is a specious argument and we need to shed light on this injustice.

Every Bitcoin transaction is traceable so the investigators ought to get busy investigating who stole our "money" and it should be returned to the rightful owners.  Having that be easier to do with BTC should be excellent PR for Bitcoin.  Afterall, what happens if you pay for a stolen ring at the local pawn shop with World Bank Mobster Ducest?

This doesn't have to involve the reversal of all those transactions but could be used to identify those responsible and those that empowered them for restitution.