Topic: Potential issues with Ripple and authorities/confiscation... (Read 465 times)
Governments could certainly force exchanges in their jurisdiction to refuse to redeem IOUs held by specific individuals, but they couldn't stop those individuals from swapping them through exchanges in other jurisdictions or through anonymous private individuals. They could also forbid exchanges, but even if they do so, and all governments do this, they won't be able to suppress anonymous use by criminals who won't be scared off, and there will probably be some otherwise law-abiding individuals who won't be scared off either and who can settle privately in cash. Governments may be able to force Ripple underground, and retard its growth a bit, but they can't stop it. Only the market could do that, perhaps because some superior competitor were to emerge.
I posted this on the RIPPLERS subreddit but figured I'd post here too to get some responses...
One of the promises of Ripple is that no one can "freeze" your accounts, and while I understand this is true WITHIN the Ripple network, what happens when you want to move something out of the Ripple network to an exchange? Wouldn't it be possible for authorities to tell exchanges to freeze or hold any deposits out of Ripple into an exchange from a particular address?
Also, since Ripple is trust dependent, people will most likely be building that trust with a particular account and nickname or real name. What would prevent a government from going after anyone that received or made transactions to a particular address associated with that name or nickname (or making it a crime for people to do so)?
Or alternatively, what would prevent a judge from forcing someone to remove items from Ripple so that governments could then confiscate them through the exchanges (or risk being jailed for contempt)?
I bring up these issues since there doesn't seem to be much anonymity in Ripple and without anonymity it would seem many of the issues Ripple is trying to address would still be issues unless some type of anonymity were implemented.
Original question posted here: http://www.reddit.com/r/ripplers/comments/1dew7r/potential_issues_with_ripple_and_authorities/
One of the promises of Ripple is that no one can "freeze" your accounts, and while I understand this is true WITHIN the Ripple network, what happens when you want to move something out of the Ripple network to an exchange? Wouldn't it be possible for authorities to tell exchanges to freeze or hold any deposits out of Ripple into an exchange from a particular address?
Also, since Ripple is trust dependent, people will most likely be building that trust with a particular account and nickname or real name. What would prevent a government from going after anyone that received or made transactions to a particular address associated with that name or nickname (or making it a crime for people to do so)?
Or alternatively, what would prevent a judge from forcing someone to remove items from Ripple so that governments could then confiscate them through the exchanges (or risk being jailed for contempt)?
I bring up these issues since there doesn't seem to be much anonymity in Ripple and without anonymity it would seem many of the issues Ripple is trying to address would still be issues unless some type of anonymity were implemented.
Original question posted here: http://www.reddit.com/r/ripplers/comments/1dew7r/potential_issues_with_ripple_and_authorities/
Jump to: