Pages:
Author

Topic: Spending and Receiving Stolen Coins. - page 3. (Read 8056 times)

legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
May 20, 2012, 07:18:38 PM
#47
All "virtual" crime can be prevented with proper IT security, so if we wanna keep the neutrality of the Internet, we should focus on prevention of virtual crime rather than punishment.


All physical thefts could be prevented with proper physical security.  
vip
Activity: 490
Merit: 271
May 20, 2012, 07:15:14 PM
#46
For me

1) Entering someone's physical house without their consent IS a crime.

2) Obtaining Bitcoin by hacking someone (just sending electrical signals on the Internet) IS NOT a crime.

The problem with making (2) a crime, is that you lose the neutrality (and free speech capabilities) of the Internet, which leads to abuse of power. All "virtual" crime can be prevented with proper IT security, so if we wanna keep the neutrality of the Internet, we should focus on prevention of virtual crime rather than punishment.

Of course, governments around the world consider both a crime, so people should be careful. Actually, pretty much anything you do can be considered suspicious criminal activity, especially just normally using Bitcoin.

Am I the only one who believes this?


No, Your #2 Scenario is wrong. I just believe that there should be shared responsibility for the theft but punishing everyone that could possibly come into contact with the coins is also wrong.

i.e. Goto down town Detroit in a Ferrari leave the keys in the car, the car running, the doors open, and leave for the day. The thief that steals the car is doing wrong, but the owner shares some responsibility. In fact, this is a well known insurance scam. The owner is expecting the car to get stolen. Sometime these type of thefts are prearranged.

This is very complicated and hard to prove much of anything. Lets drop the 'tainted' coins idea. Now if someone steals 18K Coins to an address and immediately sells from that address to a verified MTGOX account, then we can 'start' to talk. But, who is going to do that?  But other than that, this is a bad idea.
member
Activity: 100
Merit: 16
May 20, 2012, 07:06:47 PM
#45
For me

1) Entering someone's physical house without their consent IS a crime.

2) Obtaining Bitcoin by hacking someone (just sending electrical signals on the Internet) IS NOT a crime.

The problem with making (2) a crime, is that you lose the neutrality (and free speech capabilities) of the Internet, and leads to abuse of power. All "virtual" crime can be prevented with proper IT security, so if we wanna keep the neutrality of the Internet, we should focus on prevention of virtual crime rather than punishment.

Of course, governments around the world consider both a crime, so people should be careful. Actually, pretty much anything you do can be considered suspicious criminal activity, especially just normally using Bitcoin.

Am I the only one who believes this?
vip
Activity: 490
Merit: 271
May 20, 2012, 06:52:22 PM
#44
Quote

I mostly agree with your post, but I feel that we are being fixated on non-issues here, and missing the (simple) point.

Someone breaks into my apartment and steals cash and gold, or breaks into my computer and steals private keys.  To me, these are two reasonably similar scenarios from the legal and moral point of view. They stole something of value, because they know it's valuable.

In either case, I would expect to be able to report the crime to the authorities and see reasonable efforts dedicated to these being located and returned to the rightful owner, that is me. I have a friend whose car got stolen, he reported it, and months later was contacted by the police and had his car returned to him.

Ok, I'll accept that. I would assume you would report it to the Police and let everybody know what is the Police Report Number is and who is the case officer that people reporting the coins can contact. What is the Police Report number in this case and who is the case officer?
Or is this just 'self help' here?


Quote
If someone knowingly accepts stolen goods, I think in most countries they would be subject to prosecution, and I believe this to be a good thing. If your country falls into this category, but you don't like it, do everyone a favor and move someplace else, like to that paradise of like-minded people. Good luck.

Ok, the owners of the faucet have committed a crime in this scenario and should be prosecuted. Or are you saying: Knowingly? If so, I can guarantee that everyone will say they didn't knowingly do it.


Quote
If someone unknowingly accepts stolen goods, and these are at some later point identified as such by the authorities, again AFAIK in most functioning countries these goods will be returned to their rightful owner. Now, whoever accepted these goods unknowingly gets screwed - but not really. The asshole who stole my stuff and sold it or donated it to them will be responsible for making up to the victim(s).

This sort of makes sense, but soon enough you are talking about the majority of the community acting to return the coins because after awhile the 'tainted' coins will be in everyones wallet.

But more importantly, this couldn't be enforce 'equally' as some will return and some won't return. Quickly creating an imbalance where people that do return are screwing themselves compared to others that don't return. Not to mention isolating the coins from the wallet takes work and isn't supported in the official client. Coin Control could help in this but this takes work to do so not only does the honest person lose his money, he also loses his time and effort value.


Quote
So, all the yelling and kicking about "tainted" coins is missing these simple points. Tracing stolen coins is good to the extent that it might help identification of criminals, and returning of stolen goods to their rightful owners. There's really nothing more to it. It applies to cash, cars, books, and should apply to Bitcoins. I don't see the problem with it.


It 'might' do that. But it is more likely that innocent victims will be labeled and possibly prosecuted for something they had nothing to do with.

BTW: Do you have 'stolen' coins in your wallet? Do you know how to answer that question and find out? Should the average John Q Public?


You will eventually run across the occasional guy that just screams to get caught but more often than not, it will be the end receiver.

hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 501
There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.
May 20, 2012, 06:26:42 PM
#43
legendary
Activity: 1078
Merit: 1003
May 20, 2012, 06:02:45 PM
#42
Who is even deciding they are stolen?  Have they been reported stolen to the appropriate police agency in the appropriate jurisdiction? What is the Police Report Number? So people can report reception of stolen coins? Who is the assigned case officer? So the people reporting can talk to the right person.

If no report has been filed, then this is 'self help' in order to retrieve stolen coins. Which could make the people recovering the coins thieves themselves if they haven't dotted the 'i's' and crossed the 't's'.

There will be many DB's of 'Tainted' coins. Some will be updated, some will not be, some will be forgot, so when the coins are returned to a rightful owner there will be a probability that those DB's won't be updated and the coins will be confiscated again from the rightful owner.  

Then there will be the issue of why some coins form some businesses get returned but other coins form other businesses don't get returned. It will not be 'equally' enforced which is a problem in of itself.

Don't forget, it's impossible for anyone to know whether or not coins that have been stolen, even if decided by a court that the theft actually happened, there's no way to tell if one of the transactions between the theft tx and the tx transferring the coins to you was not the coins being returned to the original owner already and spent again "legitimately".
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1080
Gerald Davis
May 20, 2012, 05:17:01 PM
#41
How does it work with cash?  Like with any stolen goods?  If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime. If you don't know, then, well, you don't know. Can someone come to you the next day and say - well, those were stolen banknotes, give them back, and work things out with whoever you got them from?

To the people who were unaware they were receiving stolen Bitcoins, they would not face any charge.

Of course not, but they would be required to turn it back to the rightful owner if it were cash (or any other stolen goods) in most countries.

No you wouldn't.
hero member
Activity: 812
Merit: 1000
May 20, 2012, 04:58:58 PM
#40
Doesn't anybody else see the very Big problem with this "Recovering Tainted Coins" or even labeling them 'tainted'?

i read this whole thread, and it's quite apparent that a lot of people do (myself included).

Who is even deciding they are stolen?

Mark Karpeles, always Mark Karpeles Tongue
vip
Activity: 490
Merit: 271
May 20, 2012, 04:56:28 PM
#39
Doesn't anybody else see the very Big problem with this "Recovering Tainted Coins" or even labeling them 'tainted'?

Businesses will stay away in droves because there are to many 'what ifs' to the equation.

What If: Bicoinica stole its own coins reported them stolen and then gets to recover them after selling them at market? (Not accusing just a what if for example).

What If: A business or site isn't aware of the stolen coins and uses them and passes them on. (i.e. the Faucet) Technically the faucet received stolen coins and passed them on. Should they be responsible for the coins they passed on? Or should just the end receiver?

Who is even deciding they are stolen?  Have they been reported stolen to the appropriate police agency in the appropriate jurisdiction? What is the Police Report Number? So people can report reception of stolen coins? Who is the assigned case officer? So the people reporting can talk to the right person.

If no report has been filed, then this is 'self help' in order to retrieve stolen coins. Which could make the people recovering the coins thieves themselves if they haven't dotted the 'i's' and crossed the 't's'.

There will be many DB's of 'Tainted' coins. Some will be updated, some will not be, some will be forgot, so when the coins are returned to a rightful owner there will be a probability that those DB's won't be updated and the coins will be confiscated again from the rightful owner.  

Then there will be the issue of why some coins form some businesses get returned but other coins form other businesses don't get returned. It will not be 'equally' enforced which is a problem in of itself.

And plus: Most of the people pulling off these thefts will know how to get around the set up systems to avoid the problems of them being 'tainted' so some unsuspecting third party will get shafted.

So all these systems of labeling coins 'tainted' will only hurt the greater bitcoin community.

The Intent here is good, but remember the cliché: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
May 20, 2012, 04:29:18 PM
#38
I'll just toss this into the mixing pot ...

http://www.bitcoinfog.com/

There are so many ways to mix, disguise or confuse the coin trail.  One is of course gambling sites.  The other is random donations. 


Another pretty hard to counter trick is to buy bitcoin merchandise at bitcoin stores  and send the merchandise to known members of the community or even just a random person.  Now the 'taint trail' leads right to known people.  Or does it?  The point is almost any information you can glean from following coins may be there by accident, or on purpose.  And unlike an unexpected 'donation' to a public address, how is a store going to know that the order it received was not genuinely from the person's name entered into the address field?   It's not like the online store is going to write someone a letter to their physical address asking about the order first.  Any email address used in the order could be controlled by the tainted coin holder.

legendary
Activity: 3920
Merit: 2349
Eadem mutata resurgo
May 20, 2012, 04:08:47 PM
#37
I'll just toss this into the mixing pot ...

http://www.bitcoinfog.com/
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
May 20, 2012, 03:39:22 PM
#36
Since nobody has jurisdiction over Bitcoin, I think there is no issue. Also your definition of "stolen" is my definition of "accidentally gave away" and again there is no body with jurisdiction to make binding findings on that matter, so its all pretty moot. Secure your wallet or don't use Bitcoin. It is truly that simple.

There is an issue.  The issue is breaking into the computer that held the bitcoins.  That is a crime in most countries.  Stealing the information is also a crime in most countries.  After the fact, and once the bitcoins are transferred, they are no longer the same bitcoins.  While I would not want this to happen to me, I do agree with you that the transferred coins themselves, under a different private key, are no longer stolen.  They are not even the same coins! 

We can talk about being tainted all day long, but once transferred it may be easy to think of them as stolen, but in technicality they are not. 
Strictly speaking, you are probably right that this would not be considered theft. But in addition to unauthorized use of the computers, I believe most jurisdictions would hold the act of signing the Bitcoins over to a new address to be fraud with the equivalent fiat value in damages.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
May 20, 2012, 03:35:51 PM
#35
And the fact that Luke Jr., fascist manipulator extraordinaire, is behind the definition and the "cleansing" of this category of coin is just laughable. A developer who wants to impose his will on the world in every possible way, and especially in terms of cryptocurrency deciding what is valid and what is not? Spare me.
Your slander discredits your entire post.

Since nobody has jurisdiction over Bitcoin, I think there is no issue.
Every State has jurisdiction over Bitcoin transactions initiated or received within its borders, just like any other business done there.
legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
May 20, 2012, 03:34:52 PM
#34
Since nobody has jurisdiction over Bitcoin, I think there is no issue. Also your definition of "stolen" is my definition of "accidentally gave away" and again there is no body with jurisdiction to make binding findings on that matter, so its all pretty moot. Secure your wallet or don't use Bitcoin. It is truly that simple.

There is an issue.  The issue is breaking into the computer that held the bitcoins.  That is a crime in most countries.  Stealing the information is also a crime in most countries.  After the fact, and once the bitcoins are transferred, they are no longer the same bitcoins.  While I would not want this to happen to me, I do agree with you that the transferred coins themselves, under a different private key, are no longer stolen.  They are not even the same coins! 

We can talk about being tainted all day long, but once transferred it may be easy to think of them as stolen, but in technicality they are not. 
member
Activity: 83
Merit: 10
May 20, 2012, 03:14:29 PM
#33
Since nobody has jurisdiction over Bitcoin, I think there is no issue. Also your definition of "stolen" is my definition of "accidentally gave away" and again there is no body with jurisdiction to make binding findings on that matter, so its all pretty moot. Secure your wallet or don't use Bitcoin. It is truly that simple.
sr. member
Activity: 574
Merit: 250
May 20, 2012, 02:51:54 PM
#32
How does it work with cash?  Like with any stolen goods?  If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime. If you don't know, then, well, you don't know. Can someone come to you the next day and say - well, those were stolen banknotes, give them back, and work things out with whoever you got them from?

To the people who were unaware they were receiving stolen Bitcoins, they would not face any charge.

Of course not, but they would be required to turn it back to the rightful owner if it were cash (or any other stolen goods) in most countries.

Based on what exactly? Just because somebody claims a massive theft occurred, and lists an allege4d address that the "taintcoins" went to, there is no compelling reason to believe it is true, and there is absolutely no enforceable standard in any civilized country that would "require" anyone to send hypothetical value based on cryptographic solutions back to some other anonymous collection of cryptographic solutions. Prove rightful owner, prove these are the sames coins... can't be done. If they go through one or more legitimate transactions, or even "launderings" how can you believe they remain tainted?

The bitcoin, just like fiat, is an abstract token of value, based on an electronic solution. It has no inherent identity that you can claim is legal or illegal. If it is taken from you, but is then transferred to some other number of users through valid transactions that are accepted in the blockchain, those bitcoin are just as valid as any other.

And the fact that Luke Jr., fascist manipulator extraordinaire, is behind the definition and the "cleansing" of this category of coin is just laughable. A developer who wants to impose his will on the world in every possible way, and especially in terms of cryptocurrency deciding what is valid and what is not? Spare me.

Anybody wants to send those nasty ass coins out for good clean uses, feel free to dump them my way, and I guarantee not a single one will go through any cleansing procedure by my hand. Send them to: 1D5nEHeBzKrw57rjGFWn7JQ2dzqpHnuxVs, and feel free to track them to your hearts content.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 501
There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.
May 20, 2012, 02:16:47 PM
#31
How does it work with cash?  Like with any stolen goods?  If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime. If you don't know, then, well, you don't know. Can someone come to you the next day and say - well, those were stolen banknotes, give them back, and work things out with whoever you got them from?

To the people who were unaware they were receiving stolen Bitcoins, they would not face any charge.

Of course not, but they would be required to turn it back to the rightful owner if it were cash (or any other stolen goods) in most countries.
hero member
Activity: 756
Merit: 501
There is more to Bitcoin than bitcoins.
May 20, 2012, 02:14:08 PM
#30
If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime.
It's a crime according to who? When did I agree this is a crime?

Stop imposing your fantasy world of monopolies on violence and the laws of a group of people that call themselves the government on me, KTHXBYE.

Hazek, it's not a fantasy, it's a reality. Stolen goods. Real world. Government. Neighbors. Mainstream culture. Ignoring all this is living in a fantasy.  If someone steals my money, I am still considered the rightful owner in most functioning societies. Perhaps not in your fantasy world - but in real life, yes. If this money is ever retrieved by the police, I will be getting it back.

Bitcoin is only different in that it's still in its infancy, and maybe not recognized as money by the law enforcement and courts... yet.
R-
full member
Activity: 238
Merit: 100
Pasta
May 20, 2012, 12:04:00 PM
#29
To the people who were unaware they were receiving stolen Bitcoins, they would not face any charge.

"Mr. judge, I was unaware the lady in question was only 15 years old..." - "Well then you won't face any charge of course!"
You would make a nice policeman! Roll Eyes

Seriously, the whole thread here is a joke/perfect example how to spread FUD.

Different context. An analogous situation: Convicting the owner of a charity who accepted a small donation from an unknown individual. Also, interesting: the first example that popped into your head ^.

sr. member
Activity: 269
Merit: 250
May 20, 2012, 12:03:28 PM
#28
How does it work with cash?  Like with any stolen goods?  If you KNOW you're accepting stolen cash, you're guilty of a crime. If you don't know, then, well, you don't know. Can someone come to you the next day and say - well, those were stolen banknotes, give them back, and work things out with whoever you got them from?

To the people who were unaware they were receiving stolen Bitcoins, they would not face any charge.

The assumption behind Bitcoin is that a person or an organization is capable of protecting it's private keys. If you do not agree with this, then you also do not agree that Bitcoin has any future and you should go back to using safe and reversible fiat.
Pages:
Jump to: