Everyone needs to report the @Bitcoin twitter handle immediately

[Wind_FURY]

In any case, this is a propaganda war on both sides. It's funny seeing people bash each other on social media.

it is funny until it starts damaging the newcomers to bitcoin. millions of people are exposed to all this nonsense every day on twitter, reddit, and elsewhere and the damage is growing. for example when a newbie who wants to start getting involved with bitcoin searches and finds bitcoin.com and buys something that THEY are calling bitcoin but receives bitcoin cash instead shit like this happens https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=

What if a newbie buys Bitcoin Cash by mistake thinking that he was buying the real Bitcoin? I believe a good lawyer could argue that bitcoin.com is commiting fraud.

Are there lawyers reading this? What would be your advice? Should report the site to the proper authorities?

[Victorycoin]

This right here, I don't really think it's a problem for Ver to have the twitter account bitcoin and try to promote his coin. This would silence his argument and fail to bring  his side of the community to the table, which is unfair and unlike us I would assume. I'm not a fan of Ver either -- but is silencing him REALLY the best thing we can do.

Let him speak, even if people don't support what he has to say.

You really do not think that fronting Bitcoin, which is a renowned global brand and when unsuspecting and less informed cryptocurrency enthusiasts follow the lead, they end up with BCash, is no problem
 
The argument is clearly not about Bitcoin being superior to BCash or not or if Roger has a right to promote his coin or not. But knowing fully well that Bitcoin and BCash are entirely distinct coins and then going ahead to propose the most versatile and valuable coin, only to supply the less valuable one after money have changed hands is indeed a fraud. Roger Ver ought to be promoting  BitcoinCash, which is what his project ended at and not Bitcoin, which is an entirely different coin.

[arthotdog]

Roger Ver continues his social media manipulation campaign throught his bitcoin dot com website and Bitcoin twitter handle. In this case, my friend which is a noob, learned about Bitcoin in @Bitcoin, and he bought some, then he asked me why his Bitcoin was worth only $1190, while mine was worth $9000. I quickly realized what was up: He bought BCash, thanks to being confused by @Bitcoin. When he realized, he dumped it for Bitcoin.

This is happening DAILY. Tons of noobs get confused by the BCash retoric. They want to control all social media to push BCash into noobs.

The @Bitcoin handle was successfully canceled one due people reporting it. If we keep reporting it, they will have to close it. I would rather have it closed, than have some idiot using it for their agenda. I know no one owns the Bitcoin brand, but these scammers are actively using it to trick noobs into an altcoin, very sad.

I wonder to what extent Twitter could be hit with a class action lawsuit by allowing this bullshit. For now, all we can do is report it. Just keep reporting it and they'll have to stop it.

To report it, go here:

https://twitter.com/bitcoin

then click the 3 dots:



And im personally using this option:



since they are pretending to be Bitcoin when they are not.

Get to work guys.

Well this only mean one thing,roger ver and the gang are desperately wanted to get over bitcoin while they know that even how hard they will try,bitcoin will remain highest price coins than that BCC .lets take this as a winning strike from our bitcoin to ver's bitcoincash

[weav]

I reported it , sadly this is the only way bcash can gain some traction. By tricking new customers into buying their coin thinking they are buying bitcoin. I tried explaining to a noob that bitcoin.com has nothing to do with bitcoin , which is a bit ridiculous by itself.

[futuristic18]

Selling Bitcoin Cash as Bitcoin is fraudulent. Did your friend buy Bitcoin only to end up with Bitcoin Cash, or did he buy Bitcoin Cash thinking it was Bitcoin? The former is a crime that should be reported, while the latter could be chalked up to buyer's due diligence, or lack thereof, despite being a byproduct of legally and morally questionable marketing.

The problem with the Twitter issue is that the term Bitcoin isn't trademarked. It can't be said that the account is pretending to be someone else if there's no one who could legitimately claim the handle. It's free-for-all, and it just so happened that a hostile party got to it first.

That being said, I do hope something can be done about their marketing. They're free to claim that Bitcoin Cash is the closest thing to Satoshi's whitepaper all they want, and I would also have no qualms about them saying Bitcoin Cash should be Bitcoin. Saying Bitcoin Cash is Bitcoin, though, is not just outright misleading, but is also regrettably legal (as far as I know at least).

Excellent way of clarifying the thing for people like me. Thank you.