|
Title: legal schmegal (just one layman's opinion) Post by: cbeast on March 26, 2012, 05:09:26 PM Trying to pigeonhole Bitcoin into defined parameters in a financial world of cronyism for Wall Street and junk bonds for Main Street profferred by financial thaumaturgists is nothing short of ridiculous. Most of what is done is done behind closed doors, buried within arcane terminology, and obfuscated by contractual encryption.
Bitcoin is not a currency, it is a published token of a private intellectual property. Offering a Bitcoin product for bitcoin that has no currency attached to it is simply barter. I suspect that trustless contracts will be designed without ever needing any arbitration. Anonymity will remain secure, and profits will be made with none-the-wiser. Opportunities to invest in enterprises can open up based on social networking and rating systems. P2P transactions, decentralized exchanges, and a transparent but pseudonymous (plausibly anonymous) ledger should even make inside traders weep with joy. It may seem risky to many of us to defy financial laws, but those outmoded laws serve no purpose for transactions that could not benefit from them anyway. Even barter is still subject to taxation, so that should be the only legal obligation. BTW if you haven't seen this, it's probably one of the best takes on the future of bitcoin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GiQEECNcZM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GiQEECNcZM) Jon Matonis on Max Keiser May 31, 2011. Title: Re: legal schmegal (just one layman's opinion) Post by: benjamindees on March 26, 2012, 05:18:05 PM You still haven't defined what you believe 'currency' means.
Title: Re: legal schmegal (just one layman's opinion) Post by: cbeast on March 26, 2012, 05:29:32 PM You still haven't defined what you believe 'currency' means. The burden of proof lies upon the person positing the argument for identifying a currency. I would like to see a good argument defining Bitcoin as a currency, but as yet have not. I am much more comfortable positing Bitcoin as a publication with no more value than any other publication, except to which an individual might barter for it.Title: Re: legal schmegal (just one layman's opinion) Post by: TECSHARE on March 30, 2012, 03:18:24 PM I think the real question is....is it both, and if by law it is both a currency and a publication what restrictions could possibly be argued for? Does 1st amendment free speech protection apply to this? Which has the greater value, freedom of speech or tax policy? Will the status quo fat cats agree with you?
|