Yet Another Bitcoin Based Philosophical Question

[Lexi Price]

Premise: You were in early on the train and bought in at a few thousand for a couple hundred bucks when bitcoin was mere pennies. Then you caught the rise up to the 1000 mark...and spent a bunch of it to buy some awesome real estate.

Bitcoin continues to drop, effectively reaching its demise with no real support. It's dead, Jim. All she wrote, and so on. Everyone calls it fake, no commodity, no currency. Monopoly money.

Question: Since you bought all the real estate with virtual currency that's essentially monopoly money, no longer of any value, can the people you bought it from come back with hella judgments against for compensation in actual currency or otherwise repossess your holdings for non payment?

Would any of you think to include a clause in any contracts that state flat out that in the event the currency used for the purchase is ever defunct or worthless they're the ones SOL and not you?


It could happen  

[nioc]

Bought the real estate with silver when it was $100 an oz and now silver is $15 an oz.

Now what do you think happens?


If the price of btc or silver goes up then what, they owe you?

Edit: That was a philosophical question?

[coinableS]

Judgment, yes. You can sue anyone for just about anything, the question is whether that suit would be upheld by the court. My guess is any judge with half a brain would dismiss the case immediately. If someone sold me their house for a bunch of AOL stock in 1997, why would it be my fault if their speculative investment didn't work out? Now if I was a big player at AOL and knew the stock was about to crash in a few weeks and used it to buy something from someone, well then that would be a different story.

[Lexi Price]

True, but would they not be owed some compensation at all? If you bought a lot of valuable stuff for bitcoin and it went "belly up" then essentially you got a lot of stuff for free...so wouldn't it apply then to the one who sold it - they basically gave it away and got no compensation at the end of the day. The same could be said for USD, for that matter...lots of real estate will have been had for free if the dollar crashes. 
It's not a test - just want to offer a topic to discuss, see how it would be viewed.

[shawshankinmate37927]

What about the guy that bought two pizzas for 10,000 BTC?  Should he get most of those BTC back?

[Mr. Burns]

What about the guy that bought two pizzas for 10,000 BTC?  Should he get most of those BTC back?

What happened?  Didn't the pizzas arrive?   

[Q7]

Nobody is going to sign on and agree to that clause. This scenario applies everywhere. For example, if you ask your broker or financial adviser to provide you recommendations related to some newly launched stocks and because of the misinformed information, you ended up losing money when things go wrong. Certainly the guy cannot be held liable since he is merely doing his job based on your instruction. You should be well-known with the risks you are taking.

[jbrnt]

Question: Since you bought all the real estate with virtual currency that's essentially monopoly money, no longer of any value, can the people you bought it from come back with hella judgments against for compensation in actual currency or otherwise repossess your holdings for non payment?

Bitcoin was worth that much when the contract was signed. It is the seller's responsibility to watch the value of his investments.

[Beliathon]

Bitcoin was worth that much when the contract was signed. It is the seller's responsibility to watch the value of his investments.

This.

Question: Since you bought all the real estate with virtual currency that's essentially monopoly money, no longer of any value, can the people you bought it from come back with hella judgments against for compensation in actual currency or otherwise repossess your holdings for non payment?

Not in the United States, that's for damn sure. Probably not anywhere. By the way, all genuine, non-rhetorical questions are philosophical by definition. Pondering a question is the fundamental philosophical act. Philosophy = Philos of Sophia = love of knowledge.

A good question is much more important than a good answer. Unfortunately, you have asked a shit question. Try again.

[AT101ET]

Well as with almost all real estate sales, contracts would have been signed.
In the contract it probably would have stated the value of the total BTC at the time of the transaction (for tax and or stamp duty reasons).
The contract is binding regardless of the drop in value for the terms were agreed on and the contract is legally binding.
If not, then people who bought or sold houses at any time in the past would have continuous claims due to inflation and the nature of fluctuating currencies.
In simplified terms, if a buyer and seller agreed on a sale of a property valued at $100k and the buyer pays the $100k in silver, since the amount paid at the time of the transaction was equal or valued at $100k , the seller cannot have any legal claims against the buyer should the value of the silver drop. The mere fact that the seller accepted the silver in the first plac would attest to the fact that he was happy with the sale in the first place and the claim would thus never hold up in court.

[Light]

If you agree to sell you house for a potato and sign a contract to that effect, then as long as the buyer gives you a potato you cannot argue about it later on. There is no way in a majority of legal systems that you would be able to reneg upon your agreement unless it was stipulated in the contract that in the event Bitcoin falls to a certain level you are entitled further compensation. The reality is that no one is stupid enough to sign with a clause like that present so you'll never see a scenario like this.

[shulio]

Question: Since you bought all the real estate with virtual currency that's essentially monopoly money, no longer of any value, can the people you bought it from come back with hella judgments against for compensation in actual currency or otherwise repossess your holdings for non payment?

There is a contract to everything, if it is written well in the contract about the value of it and signed by both party than this case can be avoided, but people should know that dealing with a virtual currency has it own risk since it can be priceless in one night

[Lexi Price]

For the record, I agree with the sentiment, but it's amusing how people will conveniently shift perception of something when it suits them. Not you guys in particular, just a general statement. I can honestly see a potential scenario where someone will make a trade with bitcoin and in the event bitcoin crashes, the one who handed off valuable goods for ultimately valueless digital currency will feel cheated and the ones who got valuable goods will still muse they got a lot of stuff for free. I would expect people to realize that bitcoin has the potential to crash to zero and make that stipulation in a contract that the transaction is based on current value and they won't be compensated with any other currencies.

I just posed the scenario of someone filing lawsuits to be compensated. I mean people sue over spilling hot coffee. I can honestly see this happening at some point (provided bitcoin crashed, that is).

[Light]

Not you guys in particular, just a general statement. I can honestly see a potential scenario where someone will make a trade with bitcoin and in the event bitcoin crashes, the one who handed off valuable goods for ultimately valueless digital currency will feel cheated and the ones who got valuable goods will still muse they got a lot of stuff for free.

I would expect people to realize that bitcoin has the potential to crash to zero and make that stipulation in a contract that the transaction is based on current value and they won't be compensated with any other currencies.

I just posed the scenario of someone filing lawsuits to be compensated. I mean people sue over spilling hot coffee. I can honestly see this happening at some point (provided bitcoin crashed, that is).

People do realise this - but I reiterate that no one would be stupid enough to accept a contract where they would have to compensate someone if Bitcoin fell. From a logical standpoint, it means you'd have a hedged bet whereby if Bitcoin goes up you profited nicely and if it fell you were compensated. Either way you win - which is great for you as the seller, but shitty for the buyer.

As to lawsuits - there are people who always feel they a served an injustice when something goes wrong. It doesn't mean they are right or justified in suing - nor does it mean they will win.