Me? That's not fair. I'm not even commenting on this specific case.

I'm saying that generally speaking, a default judgment, while a victory for the plaintiff in that specific case, isn't precedent for future cases. In other words, if Jim sues Bob for breach of contract, and Bob doesn't show up, Jim will get a default judgment and "win." If Gary then decides to sue Bob for breach of contract and Bob shows up, Gary can't wave around Jim's default judgment and say "Look! He already lost before so he should lose again!"

You don't have to believe me, but I have no horse in this race, I just do my best to educate people on some of the less obvious points of the legal system.

 

Most attorneys I know are way too risk averse to accept Bitcoins.

What I think is interesting is would an attorney be able to recover in Bitcoins on a contingency case where the plaintiff recovers Bitcoins. That could be interesting, but only to legal nerds like me.

This is a fascinating discussion. Sorry for those who have lost/may have lost money.

My general thought is that, at the very worst, there is a colorable argument for recovery of the current value of the Bitcoins. You can get interest on USD judgments in similar situations, and I don't see why this would be different. You'd simply get the "interest" measured based on Bitcoin's appreciation, rather than the standard interest rate.

That's not a commentary on this specific case. I haven't examined the various TOS provisions. But generally speaking, I think the above would be the worst-case (for consumers) default scenario.

Did anyone count how many emails were leaked? Would be interesting to gauge how large their customer base is, and also the magnitude of this leak.

I'm based in New York, New York, though my practice is national. What I said is the law across the U.S., as far as I understand it.

No comment on this specific case or legal proceedings, just wanted people to be aware before they went bursting into court with this default judgment.

Hi all --

I am an attorney and I wanted to let you guys know that, due to the ethical rules, attorneys are not going to be able to post in here and solicit customers. Absent a direct and specific request by a prospective client to potentially retain a lawyer, it's prohibited by the ethical rules.

FYI - though this has been mentioned, it's worth repeating that a default judgment isn't precedential or indicative of the success of claims against BFL going forward. YMMV.

Source: I am a lawyer.

When they accidentally CC'd all their customers, did anyone take a rough estimate of how many emails there were? Trying to gauge the magnitude of this.

I'm just going to be honest and tell you I haven't a clue!

But, more importantly, I can't answer specific questions like this absent an attorney client relationship. I can answer general stuff and engage in hypotheticals, but I can't give specific legal advice without such a relationship. Ethical rules attorneys agree to.

Hi MsCollec,

First, I'm sorry for all the trouble you're having and the funds you may have lost. That's tough and particularly during the holidays...it's a shame.

The problem generally with situations like this is that the potential defendant is usually judgment proof. Either he or she will be impossible to track down, impossible to make pay, or both. Even if he has done something wrong, most lawyers (unfortunately, myself included) shy away from those kinds of cases. It's perverse, I know, since those bad actors tend to be the worst, but it's the unfortunate reality.

You may have better luck in small claims court. Sorry I can't help more. I really hope it works out for you.

(Not legal advice)

That sounds like a better question for a financial adviser, I think.

But logically speaking, wouldn't the answer depend on how you peg the value of BTC, silver, and the USD? If you think BTC will appreciate more than silver or the USD, it would seem to make sense to keep BTC. If you don't trust BTC and want something more stable, if you think silver will appreciate more than the USD, then it seems to makes sense to go silver. If you believe that whatever you plan to do with the USD will get you a better ROI than silver, USD seems the best bet. If your absolute concern is about safety and liquidity of your money, USD would probably make more sense.

Is there another concern I'm missing?

Not legal advice, just trying to logic this out.

I just wanted to introduce myself. I'm a lawyer based in New York but with a nationwide practice (dealing mainly with fraud and consumer protection). Bitcoin is fascinating to me, both on its own merits and from the legal issues it presents. I think this is apparent from some of the discussions surrounding Hashfast and other custom hardware manufacturers that may have made some mistakes (perhaps an understatement) along the way.

I believe I have a lot to add to some of those discussions, once I'm no longer restricted to newbie-ville. I'm actually interested in writing a series of articles on some of these issues, assuming I can find the time in between doing real lawyering  . One thing I'd be interested in discussing in particular is whether, in the absence of a contractual provision stating otherwise, the purchaser of a product for bitcoins entitled to a refund in bitcoins if the seller fails to deliver?

I believe the answer is yes.

In the meantime, while I'm restricted to the newbie forum (and even beyond) if anyone has any thoughts or interesting legal hypotheticals, I'd be glad to entertain. None of it should be construed as legal advice, however.

Hope everyone is having a wonderful 2014 so far.