Pages:
Author

Topic: What if you bought some of those stolen Mt Gox Bitcoins? - page 2. (Read 9148 times)

legendary
Activity: 1386
Merit: 1004
WOW... the lack of common sense is truly a sight to behold!

Quite simply, this WOULDN'T happen with cash - so therefore wouldn't happen with Bitcoin

....I don't see the confusion

Cash = legal tender.

Gold != legal tender

Gold can be confiscated if you buy it and it was stolen property.

Can't you read my prior post, or are you fucking blind?

Legal tender is given this protection, because the government provides consumer protection against theft, e.g. FDIC insurance, tracking down serial numbers on bills, chargebacks on credit cards, etc.. It is their racket, and so they give it is special status.

Since most gold gets melted and recombined over and over, and there is a lot of gold theft, is most gold subject to confiscation now as most gold contains some part that was stolen at some point?
newbie
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
Sorry if this was discussed, but in USA if you buy stolen property and you are caught with it you have to return it to the original owner at your loss.

This is utter bullshit.  The person who stole it is responsible for all losses under US law.

For example, say I steal your credit card and buy a $2000 flat screen from Best Buy, but on my way home I get into an accident and the TV is destroyed.  Once the the FBI catches me, it's MY responsibility to fork over the $2000 not Best Buy's.
legendary
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
There is no such thing as a stolen bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not property.

It is a ledger with a set of rules. Those rules are determined by consensus and enforced by the protocol. If you choose to take part in the game, you agree to accept the validity of the rules, and any future changes to the rules as determined by consensus.

With bitcoin, the rule is unambiguous: Whoever validly signs the transaction, "owns" the bitcoin.  

You cannot claim to be a legal "owner" of some bitcoin if you do not have the ability to sign (ie. knowledge of private key) because the bitcoin clients/developers/businesses never made such a promise, implicitly or explicitly, and the above rule was clear from the start.

Just because around 2010 everyone started behaving as if it was property doesn't make it property.  The mtgox victims never actually owned any bitcoins. At best, they owned bitcoin IOUs. It's sad that they were misled by mtgox's marketing and that we failed to educate them better about the above.

If you think this is all just theoretical musings,  remember this:

Indeed the above is all theoretical bullshit that won't help you in reality. The law is the law. The will and power of society is what wins because BITCOIN IS NOT ANONYMOUS. And Mt.Gox's Terms of Service was (as I documented in a linked post in an upthread post) they were acting as an agent with YOUR bitcoin property.

Any bitcoin can be "dispropriated " by consensus.  Not by the government, not by the legal system, not by the police, but only by the protocol itself.

Irrelevant, the law can confiscate other real property and/or garnish wages, because BITCOIN IS NOT ANONYMOUS.

Notwithstanding that the consensus is already controlled by a few mining pools, which can easily be expropriated by the government either overtly or covertly.

if bitcoin were property in any legal sense those protocol changes would have been Illegal!

No. They would have gone to a judge for a fair ruling, if there was enough incentive, but apparently not enough people were harmed wrongly in order to bring it to court.

PS. I don't want to condone antisocial behaviour like the mtgox heists, but the solution should come from the protocol itself, eg. in the form of multisig and timelocked transaction. It should not come from wrongly treating bitcoins as property.

I agree one of the solutions is decentralized exchange, but this won't stop all the theft and criminal activities that are tainting Bitcoin in ever increasing proportions.

Only will be true with rock solid, widespread anonymity. And Bitcoin will NEVER have that!  Never.

Tl;Dr code is law

It could be, with rock solid, widespread anonymity. But Bitcoin doesn't have this and NEVER will.

Tl;Dr Repudiation is always possible if there is not rock solid, widespread anonymity.

Tl;Dr Code is law iff the identities of the participants can not be discovered.

Quote
Irrelevant, the law can confiscate other real property and/or garnish wages, because BITCOIN IS NOT ANONYMOUS.

Irrelevant, the law has to establish a case for bitcoin, which means accepting it as legal tender, which then means, law starts then. Which will nevr happen.

Quote
Notwithstanding that the consensus is already controlled by a few mining pools, which can easily be expropriated by the government either overtly or covertly.

Unless D.O.D comes up with a new really good ASIC, then manages to overtake the network before we can notice and react. Which falls to consensus yet again, ant dev will just roll back, switch algos place some new checkpoints and we'll continue, right where we left off. They can hold their "bitcoins" which we either invalidate, or they become worthless because the community that gives them value, has moved on.

Quote
No. They would have gone to a judge for a fair ruling, if there was enough incentive, but apparently not enough people were harmed wrongly in order to bring it to court.

The only "property" a government can effect is that which can be verified by a ledger they control. So judge rules in their favour at block 300000.....just where do you think the next community consensus hard fork is going to start?

Quote
It could be, with rock solid, widespread anonymity. But Bitcoin doesn't have this and NEVER will.

I would not be surprised if new protocols and measures are introduced along with chain size reduction.

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
There is no such thing as a stolen bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not property.

It is a ledger with a set of rules. Those rules are determined by consensus and enforced by the protocol. If you choose to take part in the game, you agree to accept the validity of the rules, and any future changes to the rules as determined by consensus.

With bitcoin, the rule is unambiguous: Whoever validly signs the transaction, "owns" the bitcoin.  

You cannot claim to be a legal "owner" of some bitcoin if you do not have the ability to sign (ie. knowledge of private key) because the bitcoin clients/developers/businesses never made such a promise, implicitly or explicitly, and the above rule was clear from the start.

Just because around 2010 everyone started behaving as if it was property doesn't make it property.  The mtgox victims never actually owned any bitcoins. At best, they owned bitcoin IOUs. It's sad that they were misled by mtgox's marketing and that we failed to educate them better about the above.

If you think this is all just theoretical musings,  remember this:

Indeed the above is all theoretical bullshit that won't help you in reality. The law is the law. The will and power of society is what wins because BITCOIN IS NOT ANONYMOUS. And Mt.Gox's Terms of Service was (as I documented in a linked post in an upthread post) they were acting as an agent with YOUR bitcoin property.

Any bitcoin can be "dispropriated " by consensus.  Not by the government, not by the legal system, not by the police, but only by the protocol itself.

Irrelevant, the law can confiscate other real property and/or garnish wages, because BITCOIN IS NOT ANONYMOUS.

Notwithstanding that the consensus is already controlled by a few mining pools, which can easily be expropriated by the government either overtly or covertly.

if bitcoin were property in any legal sense those protocol changes would have been Illegal!

No. They would have gone to a judge for a fair ruling, if there was enough incentive, but apparently not enough people were harmed wrongly in order to bring it to court.

PS. I don't want to condone antisocial behaviour like the mtgox heists, but the solution should come from the protocol itself, eg. in the form of multisig and timelocked transaction. It should not come from wrongly treating bitcoins as property.

I agree one of the solutions is decentralized exchange, but this won't stop all the theft and criminal activities that are tainting Bitcoin in ever increasing proportions.

Only will be true with rock solid, widespread anonymity. And Bitcoin will NEVER have that!  Never.

Tl;Dr code is law

It could be, with rock solid, widespread anonymity. But Bitcoin doesn't have this and NEVER will.

Tl;Dr Repudiation is always possible if there is not rock solid, widespread anonymity.

Tl;Dr Code is law iff the identities of the participants can not be discovered.
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
There is no such thing as a stolen bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not property.

It is a ledger with a set of rules. Those rules are determined by consensus and enforced by the protocol. If you choose to take part in the game, you agree to accept the validity of the rules, and any future changes to the rules as determined by consensus.

With bitcoin, the rule is unambiguous: Whoever validly signs the transaction, "owns" the bitcoin.  

You cannot claim to be a legal "owner" of some bitcoin if you do not have the ability to sign (ie. knowledge of private key) because the bitcoin clients/developers/businesses never made such a promise, implicitly or explicitly, and the above rule was clear from the start.

Just because around 2010 everyone started behaving as if it was property doesn't make it property.  The mtgox victims never actually owned any bitcoins. At best, they owned bitcoin IOUs. It's sad that they were misled by mtgox's marketing and that we failed to educate them better about the above.

If you think this is all just theoretical musings,  remember this:

Any bitcoin can be "dispropriated " by consensus.  Not by the government, not by the legal system, not by the police, but only by the protocol itself.

This has already happened twice. Once after the generation bug in 2010 and once after the forking event in 2012.

if bitcoin were property in any legal sense those protocol changes would have been Illegal! which would be absurd because they were commited by the very owners of that property, ie the collective of all miners and users.

PS. I don't want to condone antisocial behaviour like the mtgox heists, but the solution should come from the protocol itself, eg. in the form of multisig and timelocked transaction. It should not come from wrongly treating bitcoins as property.

Tl;Dr code is law









code is law - going to my sig Wink
member
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
There is hundreds of years of case law that already settled this question.

In most jurisdictions (Switzerland being an exception) if you purchase stolen unique goods, such as a painting or a sculpture, even if you didn't know that it was stollen and you acted in good faith, the legal title for these goods remains with the original owner.  

This does not apply, however, to non-unique or fungible items like dollar bills or bitcoins.  If your restaurant receives payment in bills that were stolen from a bank robbery, then these bills remain your property provided you received them in good faith (i.e., you weren't in on some sort of money laundering operation).  This applies even if the serial numbers of the stolen bills are known.  If you think about it, a cash economy couldn't function any other way!  

Another note is that, even after a few transactions, you can't really refer to "this bitcoin" or "that bitcoin".   Let's say Alice unknowingly receives a stollen 1 BTC coin.  She then sends that 1 BTC to Bob using the Blockchain.info SharedCoin feature.  Shared coin merges, for example, ten 1 BTC outputs (all from different people) into 1 transaction, and then send those bitcoins out to, say, 10 different addresses.  There is no longer a blockchain record that shows that Alice's address sent 1 BTC to Bob's address.  Instead, Bob's bitcoin has 10% taint with the bitcoin that Alice sent.  Now, if Bob sends 5 mBTC from that coin to pay for a coffee, and then the merchant moves all customer payments for the week to a new address (and thus likely into a single, say, 5 BTC coin) this new coin shares 0.01% taint with the original stolen coin that Alice unknowingly received from MtGox.  

Pretty soon, the taint has diffused throughout the economy!

As an experiment: go to blockchain.info and look-up one of your bitcoin addresses and select the "taint analysis" option. I bet there is taint linking it to hundreds or thousands of other addresses.  There's a good chance that your address has 0.0023% taint of a coin used for something illegal.  Just like a few of the twenty-dollar bills that you'll use this year had at some point in the past been used to pay for marijuana.    

In conclusion:
- If you receive stollen coins in good faith, they become your legal property.  
- After several transactions, a 100% stollen coins get fuzzed-out across numerous coins, each sharing a small amount of taint with the original.  



exactly - like here:
https://blockchain.info/tx/e4abb15310348edc606e597effc81697bfce4b6de7598347f17c2befd4febf3b
https://blockchain.info/address/13HEd5ignWCm5kUnzDkQUzbWWaSh51VVmn

1. if i tell u who owns what adr on left side - how u tell me who owns right side adr.? after 5x this?
2. if 1BTC coming from adr1 on left side (output) - which adr. did recieve it on right side (spent?)
u can follow it:
https://blockchain.info/address/13HEd5ignWCm5kUnzDkQUzbWWaSh51VVmn
https://blockchain.info/address/1Cyz2wm2Q2EyaoQsD3KvBCABbGwDS6DGAo
https://blockchain.info/address/15cFvmatzfdyT8QTCq1L1ixbhgcRaea7GC
and if this happens hundreds times in 2 years???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
legendary
Activity: 938
Merit: 1001
bitcoin - the aerogel of money
There is no such thing as a stolen bitcoin.

Bitcoin is not property.

It is a ledger with a set of rules. Those rules are determined by consensus and enforced by the protocol. If you choose to take part in the game, you agree to accept the validity of the rules, and any future changes to the rules as determined by consensus.

With bitcoin, the rule is unambiguous: Whoever validly signs the transaction, "owns" the bitcoin.  

You cannot claim to be a legal "owner" of some bitcoin if you do not have the ability to sign (ie. knowledge of private key) because the bitcoin clients/developers/businesses never made such a promise, implicitly or explicitly, and the above rule was clear from the start.

Just because around 2010 everyone started behaving as if it was property doesn't make it property.  The mtgox victims never actually owned any bitcoins. At best, they owned bitcoin IOUs. It's sad that they were misled by mtgox's marketing and that we failed to educate them better about the above.

If you think this is all just theoretical musings,  remember this:

Any bitcoin can be "dispropriated " by consensus.  Not by the government, not by the legal system, not by the police, but only by the protocol itself.

This has already happened twice. Once after the generation bug in 2010 and once after the forking event in 2012.

if bitcoin were property in any legal sense those protocol changes would have been Illegal! which would be absurd because they were commited by the very owners of that property, ie the collective of all miners and users.

PS. I don't want to condone antisocial behaviour like the mtgox heists, but the solution should come from the protocol itself, eg. in the form of multisig and timelocked transaction. It should not come from wrongly treating bitcoins as property.

Tl;Dr code is law
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Maybe you should have (sold BTC above $1000) purchased some gold at the $1150 low, since it has no traceable ledger.

Yet I speculate there will be another dip closer to $1000 after this spring rally. Gold won't blast off until after 2015.

Quote
Gold is going to rise WHEN capital realizes that we have a geopolitical problem [after 2015] and there is uncertainly on the horizon as to what monetary system emerges afterwards. This is the real issue – not inflation. Plain and simple, gold reach $875 in 1980 and the Dow 1,000. The Dow has reached almost 17,000 and gold at its peak below $2,000. From a plain numbers game, the Dow was a far better hedge against “inflation” than gold since 1980.

See also:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/02/24/gold-all-lathered-up-but-are-we-ready-to-go/
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Wall Street Journal reporter who contacted me
Congrats, let us know when the article comes out.

I refused to be interviewed. I offered to answer questions anonymously only. I don't want to involved as public figure. I would prefer not to even be making a big noise here, but someone needs to present the other side of the argument against the collective "group think" here. I am merely trying to inform my fellow Libertarians. I hope some of you will join me to something better. The rest of you can get what you deserve.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Cash = legal tender.

Gold != legal tender

Gold can be confiscated if you buy it and it was stolen property.

Can't you read my prior post, or are you fucking blind?

Legal tender is given this protection, because the government provides consumer protection against theft, e.g. FDIC insurance, tracking down serial numbers on bills, chargebacks on credit cards, etc.. It is their racket, and so they give it is special status.

First walk to wardrobe.. Open bottom drawer... Remove thinking cap... Then Put on head.

This is simple logic, with a dash of common sense sprinkled on top for you.. enjoy...

How many bank robberies have taken place over the past 100 years? ...Store robberies... Brinks truck heists... Casino Heists... There is ALWAYS a % of this "legal-tender" you speak of that is NEVER recovered.

Why do you think that is? (I hope you have your thinking cap on properly) ...Do you think these bills are just dispensed into the realms of the unknown? Of course not, they are spent - laundered etc.

"Legal-tender" or not... If I walk to the store, buy some milk, receive change and it turns of that ONE bill was "stolen" many years, months or days before - do I have an obligation to return this bill? ...does the government have the right to seize this bill?... Of course not!

It has been recovered. You pay taxes for the police, the NSA, the recent $8 trillion QE public backstop on TBTF banks, etc..

People don't keep much of their money in cash, and they feel safe in banks.

Cash doesn't have a ledger like Bitcoin does where everything is tracked precisely.

If Bitcoin will be mass adopted by grandma, then the same peace-of-mind will exist and be provided for by the financial institutions that run this world. Then they will bless Bitcoin.

And if you don't believe they are in control, then I will lend you my tinfoil hat.
legendary
Activity: 2646
Merit: 1137
All paid signature campaigns should be banned.
Wall Street Journal reporter who contacted me
Congrats, let us know when the article comes out.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Here is a set of directions for the G20. I suggest that Wall Street Journal reporter who contacted me, can refer to this post.

hmmm the gox problem.

0) figure out the exact amount of missing coins and figure out where they went

Government directs through public announcements for users to document their stolen BTC, perhaps at a global entity website. Previously filed cases with local authorities can be forwarded.

1) verify which balance include part of the stolen ones

This can be automated. It is all on the blockchain. Mixers (a.k.a. laundries, tumblers, CoinJoin, etc) could simply pollute all outputs on the mixer.

2) Contact persons in possession by finding  actual Identities without infringing on rights....for which said agency is opening it'self wide for a class privacy lawsuit

You have no rights any more as the $150 trillion global debt bubble collapses society into a pancake chaos, because too many people are trying to hide assets from the onerous taxation and confiscation coming. The society will try to tax and claw-back as necessary in order to meet the impossible (bankrupted) obligations of the government. Observe carefully post-2015.

The NSA & GCHQ can correlate your identity (read all my posts in that linked thread).

3) prove that they actually are in my possession

Irrelevant. You are liable because you possessed. The law doesn't require you to still be possession.

4) gain access to my wallet
5) try to break my password, 215 characters
6) separate stolen from legitimate inputs

Not necessary. Just confiscate your real assets and auction them to recover the value stolen. Or garnish your wages.

7) figure out which gox customer exactly owned those particular coins
Cool manage to distribute each and every coin to its owner

Already explained in #0 above.

this all assumes i am in the U.S, now, in my country the U.S has no power

Keep dreaming of your Alice in Wonderland fantasy. Meanwhile the G20 has been ramping up their coordination to go after all those Europeans who have been hiding assets abroad. They've got to pay that unpayable $150 trillion debt somehow.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
How would you propose they return coins to the victim of a theft if his coins are now distributed as taint across 24,000 other coins?  Say Sally has 1 BTC that has 0.002% taint of a coin that was stolen from Sam.  Would they correlate Sally's human identity with her 1 BTC wallet, find her somehow, and then ask for 0.002% x 1 BTC = 2000 Satoshi's back?  And then they would find the other 23,999 coins and do the same?  And what if Sally was also the victim of a theft at some prior point in time, but the Coin Rescuers hadn't found her coins yet.  She might be upset that you're taking some of her coins, when she was a victim herself.  Do you think you could add an appeal process so that victims waiting for their settlements could defer having a portion of their coins removed?

The authorities could either start as early in the chain as possible where the stolen coin is not very distributed, especially since many Bitcoin investors hold long-term. And these big fish (if Bitcoin goes to $1 million, then BTC100 is worth $100 million) would be the most lucrative to attack as well.

And at some point in the game, the G20 could declare a class action against Bitcoin in the collective public interest. They can mandate a tax on all conversions of Bitcoin to fiat to fund a new global insurance agency, which will be responsible for paying the victims.

Since this would be very popular given so many millions of people will have been stolen from (and told by the callous community of idealists that this was their learning experience and "c'est la vie" you have no recourse), this is the perfect way to begin to institute a world government, i.e. to have a demand for a global entity. You've provided a popular demand for a function that only government can do with its mandate on the use of force, which is the worst possible thing for liberty. It is so clever how this design leverages the Libertarians to help promote global governance. Makes me want to puke. And I am not going to stand idle and watch like a deer in the headlights. I am a real minanarchist-Libertarian (actually a contentionist) not like you mofos.

This is yet another in my long list of reasons to know with relative certainty that Bitcoin was planted by the powers-that-be who have for a long-time stated they intended for us to have a world government, i.e. the powerful group behind the launch of the failed League of Nations.

Bitcoin was well designed to have this outcome, because there are alternative designs for a crypto-currency which don't have this repudiation ex post facto weakness. I will be moving my investment (not from Bitcoin since I wasn't invested in it other than my effort to research it) to one of these superior altcoins soon.

You all can stay in the NWO coin. Have fun.
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
hmmm the gox problem.

0) figure out the exact amount of missing coins and figure out where they went
1) verify which balance include part of the stolen ones
2) Contact persons in possession by finding  actual Identities without infringing on rights....for which said agency is opening it'self wide for a class privacy lawsuit
3) prove that they actually are in my possession
4) gain access to my wallet
5) try to break my password, 215 characters
6) separate stolen from legitimate inputs
7) figure out which gox customer exactly owned those particular coins
Cool manage to distribute each and every coin to its owner

quite frankly without trying to confuse each other with technical stuff....it's a non starter.

this all assumes i am in the U.S, now, in my country the U.S has no power, no say in legal matters and definitely not on illegitimate currency. So, what if 45% of the coins are in countries that do not care what Americans do? This exercise (theoretically) would only be useful if it were a national crypto currrecy, not one that is spread over the world, and certainly not in one whose tx are irreversible.


it doesn't matter if the USA can find the money, and they can, what's important is that the cryptocurrency community find the money for the sanity and security of the cc industry especially btc. 

right now the current true value of btc is about $400, add it the hype it's about $1000, subtract the FUD it's about $600, remove the uncertainty it's down to $500. when the uncertainty turns to certain and that certainty isn't positive then the $500 goes to $300.  If you are unable to trust anyone further that you can throw them you are not going to work with very many people. 



sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
thieves, hackers, inside job person/people, and those who knowingly buy stolen anything (hint: large amounts of BTC at discount price) can be held legally liable (aka jail/prison)......there must be intent for there to be a crime.....

because most of U.S. MONEY  has traces of cocaine, marijuana and other drugs we now have to give back our money?? In theory yes, in reality NO.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
so far I would have to say it's a yes and no answer. In theory yes you have tainted goods, whether its currency or not does not matter, but  no most of us would not have to give it back or have it confiscated because as time goes by and users move their btc around it will become harder and harder to track.

But if you have a wallet full of stolen/missing btc, and it is traced to you, then that would not be good......

the point.....use your btc more and more.......i know i felt stupid when Apple removed btc wallets from the APP store and I didn't have a wallet on my iphone when I could have had one....but alas there is a remedy for that and so now I have BTC (small amount in case of loss)
on my phone so I can eat.....now to find a restaurant that takes my BTC

Get off that iPhone man. Bitcoin is all Android, all the time.

iPhone is good for checking up on that fiat in your Citibank account, because Apple has taken what can only be called an "Anti-Bitcoin" stance.
i know, i know, but i found a work around.....hehehehe.....and i feel good about it because i only use it for good and still get my blockchain wallet....

and Apple wants in on mobile payments is why they are now 100% against BTC.....bad idea on Apple's part.
hero member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 500
so far I would have to say it's a yes and no answer. In theory yes you have tainted goods, whether its currency or not does not matter, but  no most of us would not have to give it back or have it confiscated because as time goes by and users move their btc around it will become harder and harder to track.

But if you have a wallet full of stolen/missing btc, and it is traced to you, then that would not be good......

the point.....use your btc more and more.......i know i felt stupid when Apple removed btc wallets from the APP store and I didn't have a wallet on my iphone when I could have had one....but alas there is a remedy for that and so now I have BTC (small amount in case of loss)
on my phone so I can eat.....now to find a restaurant that takes my BTC

Get off that iPhone man. Bitcoin is all Android, all the time.

iPhone is good for checking up on that fiat in your Citibank account, because Apple has taken what can only be called an "Anti-Bitcoin" stance.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
Sorry if this was discussed, but in USA if you buy stolen property and you are caught with it you have to return it to the original owner at your loss.

Now, lets say someone did steal the Mt Gox. Bitcoins, and then you bought some of them unknowingly.

If they could trace back through the blockchain that those bitcoins were indeed stolen Mt. Gox. coins, wouldn't they be able to take them back from you?

I doubt that this would happen.  The Bitcoins would not have the same address.  They are not the same Bitcoins.

Maybe Bitcoins obtained straight from a stolen source are one thing, but Bitcoins that have transferred MANY times with differing amounts over a year?  What basis would that be?  They do not do that with cash or currency. 

sure they do,

the OP is correct if you are able to track, trace, or connect the dots then you are obligated to return the money.

Jewish organizations are collecting gold, money, and many other valuable things that they were able to convince a judge, and or jury that was stolen from their people during their stay at auschwitz concentration camps.   

the blockchain provides a perfect vehicle for that connecting of the dots.

Now let's look at it in a bit of a different way, if I sold my car to you and you gave me counterfeit money which I took to the bank, who subsequently confiscated said fakes funds.  Do you think you are off the hook for my money?  Of course not, regardless of the law, but in this case the law is on my side.   You would also need to do some 'spaning to the coppers.

The very definition of money laundering is taking ill gotten gains and introducing it into legal commerce.  So if you purchased a btc for $40 when the going rate was $80 or $800 there is likely a good reason for it.    The block chain might not be able to tell us the market rate for the coin at that time but you can put together perfect valuations for what the coin was worth at the time of the transfer simply be average all of the coins sold in that block or perhaps the chain of blocks for that hour surrounding that transaction.


being uncooperative only serves to distance yourself from the good of the community, as the community matures it will tend to remember the bad guy with perfect recall

Armis, in your example here, unfortunately how it really works is that YOU would be in JAIL, even though you TRULY would be the innocent party.....trust me on this one, I deal with this everyday of my life and know for a fact that you would be dealing with it first, long before the bad guy would have to.
sr. member
Activity: 336
Merit: 250
so far I would have to say it's a yes and no answer. In theory yes you have tainted goods, whether its currency or not does not matter, but  no most of us would not have to give it back or have it confiscated because as time goes by and users move their btc around it will become harder and harder to track.

But if you have a wallet full of stolen/missing btc, and it is traced to you, then that would not be good......

the point.....use your btc more and more.......i know i felt stupid when Apple removed btc wallets from the APP store and I didn't have a wallet on my iphone when I could have had one....but alas there is a remedy for that and so now I have BTC (small amount in case of loss)
on my phone so I can eat.....now to find a restaurant that takes my BTC
hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 501
Sorry if this was discussed, but in USA if you buy stolen property and you are caught with it you have to return it to the original owner at your loss.

Now, lets say someone did steal the Mt Gox. Bitcoins, and then you bought some of them unknowingly.

If they could trace back through the blockchain that those bitcoins were indeed stolen Mt. Gox. coins, wouldn't they be able to take them back from you?

I doubt that this would happen.  The Bitcoins would not have the same address.  They are not the same Bitcoins.

Maybe Bitcoins obtained straight from a stolen source are one thing, but Bitcoins that have transferred MANY times with differing amounts over a year?  What basis would that be?  They do not do that with cash or currency. 

sure they do,

the OP is correct if you are able to track, trace, or connect the dots then you are obligated to return the money.

Jewish organizations are collecting gold, money, and many other valuable things that they were able to convince a judge, and or jury that was stolen from their people during their stay at auschwitz concentration camps.   

the blockchain provides a perfect vehicle for that connecting of the dots.

Now let's look at it in a bit of a different way, if I sold my car to you and you gave me counterfeit money which I took to the bank, who subsequently confiscated said fakes funds.  Do you think you are off the hook for my money?  Of course not, regardless of the law, but in this case the law is on my side.   You would also need to do some 'spaning to the coppers.

The very definition of money laundering is taking ill gotten gains and introducing it into legal commerce.  So if you purchased a btc for $40 when the going rate was $80 or $800 there is likely a good reason for it.    The block chain might not be able to tell us the market rate for the coin at that time but you can put together perfect valuations for what the coin was worth at the time of the transfer simply be average all of the coins sold in that block or perhaps the chain of blocks for that hour surrounding that transaction.


being uncooperative only serves to distance yourself from the good of the community, as the community matures it will tend to remember the bad guy with perfect recall
Pages:
Jump to: