The idea of internet anonymity makes some fraudsters unreasonably bold.
I gave a location where any of you could find me. No one showed up (from this community, that is). It wasn't a dark alley where I'd gut shoot you, either. It was a public place, and anyone who wanted to confront me or something could have. Every last one of you with opinions failed to put your money where you mouth is. I'm not unreasonably bold. I just have self-confidence, unlike those who scream, tantrum, and threaten, and then fail to deliver.
Fortunately, some of them are daft enough to disclose their own bank account details in unrelated transactions.
That isn't daft. It's business. You would disclose your bank account details if you were trying to receive funds via ACH transfer.
Some even manage to get scammed themselves!
Cost of doing business. Get 40, lose 17. You still make out okay in the end, and that's the entire point.
Give it a year or so and the courts and the police will be much better set up to deal with this sort of thing.
200% true, especially if *coins start to become widely accepted by "established" merchants.
They can now, of course, but it takes time and effort.
No. They cannot. There is simply too much anonymity regarding either identities, transactions, or the exact definition of what a bitcoin is.
Take this example:
Bob sells Fred 200 BTC. Bob sends Fred the coins. Fred tells Bob to shove off.
You can not prove that Fred specifically received those coins. They went to a wallet of some kind. That wallet can easily be deleted.
Furthermore, coins can be sent to various destinations to be tumbled, and then shuffled back to a "clean" wallet.
As I've said for a week now - the very nature of Bitcoins makes it impossible to connect a "coin" with a "person". If Bob says "I was Skyping with Fred. I have a video of Fred saying "Okay, send the coins." I have proof that Fred received the coins.", then that statement is incorrect. Bob would in fact have proof that Fred was attempting to purchase Bitcoins, but there is no definitive proof that Fred received those Bitcoins.
Until legal definitions are established regarding "ownership" of a wallet, where signing an address makes you the legal owner of that address, no one can really do anything regarding lost currency.
In fact, I'd wager the 5.7 BTC that I've made recently that the majority of actions taken by PayPal, banks, and other establishments towards "Bitcoin fraud" have not been made for the benefit of the poor taffer who lost his/her coins, but rather to the detriment of the guy who broke a ToS of some kind.
Anyway. Long rant. This of course is just my opinion, and I've tried to be as objective as possible with it. Even if I weren't carrying the reputation that I have, I'd still have these observations. The bitcoin legal ground is almost laughable, and headhunting under the current judicial system would be akin to saying to a judge "Your honor - this man stole my imaginary money! He didn't send me real money for my imaginary money!". Obviously this is a generalization, but it's an accurate lens through which the majority of courts would see the entire situation.
Too many victims give up.
See above. Go back to mining, and/or counting the coins you folks bought at $20/unit. For the rest of you who got here late in the game - life sucks.