Bitcoin becomes 100% unregulated in Japan!!!

[Bitcoinpro]

Can't really nitpick the wording too much since most likely the original wording is in Japanese.

plus the fact a banker probably wrote wat he said

and also told him how high to jump

but ill give him the benefit of the doubt 

[alani123]

So with no ownership over bitcoin, I'd expect cryptocurrencies to never be widespread in Japan. Then again, we don't know hoe valid this order is and how seriously is going to be regarded.

The only thing you need to own a bitcoin is to hold the private key. The government cannot do anything to change that basic fact.

But then again, what happens if you can't pursue third party services for stealing your bitcoins, overcharging etc. I don't see Japan being a good place to start a bitcoin related business after this.

[unusualfacts30]

http://www.coindesk.com/tokyo-court-bitcoin-not-subject-to-ownership-2/

Judge Masumi Kurachi ruled that, due to their intangible nature and reliance on third parties, bitcoins cannot be covered under existing law.

This is quite awesome. Set up exchanges, set up payment processors, set up whatever you want with Bitcoin in Japan. It is not covered under the law.

Soon world will follow Japan.

[Elwar]

So with no ownership over bitcoin, I'd expect cryptocurrencies to never be widespread in Japan. Then again, we don't know hoe valid this order is and how seriously is going to be regarded.

The only thing you need to own a bitcoin is to hold the private key. The government cannot do anything to change that basic fact.

But then again, what happens if you can't pursue third party services for stealing your bitcoins, overcharging etc. I don't see Japan being a good place to start a bitcoin related business after this.

Use escrow services, multi-sig, all sorts of technology that make laws meaningless...

[unamis76]

[AgentofCoin]

http://www.coindesk.com/tokyo-court-bitcoin-not-subject-to-ownership-2/

Judge Masumi Kurachi ruled that, due to their intangible nature and reliance on third parties, bitcoins cannot be covered under existing law.

This is quite awesome. Set up exchanges, set up payment processors, set up whatever you want with Bitcoin in Japan. It is not covered under the law.

I think it is covered. It will fall under assets/properties as a catchall.
This Judge just messed up and made an incorrect decision that will be easily overturned.
The Judge just got confused with the Bitcoin System and the Plaintiff(s) didn't properly argue.

[meono]

I suspect along time ago that mtGox mystery incident is related to underground clan. I mean Mark might just be a puppet

If you guys dont know about Japan, its culture is very much tighten to mafia clans, from politics to lifestyle. Notice all the underground activities like Gambling , prostitution happen every where in Japan? Even city Major elections are funded by clans.

Mark would not dare to stay in the open if he was not protected by a clan.

[Nagle]

As usual, Coindesk has it wrong. See the Japan Times article. This is just a ruling that Bitcoins are fungible. Someone brought a lawsuit demanding the return of the Bitcoins they deposited, as specific items of property. That works if you lent someone a car and they went bankrupt. But not if you lent them, say, a delivery of fuel oil which then went into their tank. This is just a ruling that Bitcoin is more like a commodity than an object.

[meono]

As usual, Coindesk has it wrong. See the Japan Times article. This is just a ruling that Bitcoins are fungible. Someone brought a lawsuit demanding the return of the Bitcoins they deposited, as specific items of property. That works if you lent someone a car and they went bankrupt. But not if you lent them, say, a delivery of fuel oil which then went into their tank. This is just a ruling that Bitcoin is more like a commodity than an object.

That makes absolutely no sense at all.

Please stop dreaming. If the court ruled that the plaintiff cant not seek the same amount of btc back, it means btc has no value. Dont try to twist it around.

I dont see how you think this is about fungible. Commodity or not, the court would have ruled the plaintiff his loss.

[manselr]

Does this mean that you can freely open bitcoin casinos in japan, a country where gambling is strictly illegal except yakuza pachinko parlors?

Hmm, gambling with something that they see as having no value...I guess it would be allowed. Don't quote me on that though.

How can they see it has having no value when 1 unit of the Bitcoin network is universally valued at 280 USD? What is this sorcery? I surely don't get it. Does it mean you can cash out in japanese yen without fearing you will get investigated by mr taxman? I just dont get the rammifications of such claim.

[gogxmagog]

I'm thinking that this ruling has more to do with paving the ground to introduce total bitcoin regulation.

I dont know Japanese law, but rulings like this define the object in question (BTC) so that they can target the 3rd parties related to it (exchanges, etc)

this isnt an open and shut thing... its the start of a tsunami of legislation.

anyways..."ongoing" and watched closely...

[countryfree]

I wish I could read the original ruling in Japanese. There's something wrong here. There are intellectual property laws in Japan. Companies pay big money to get their technical findings protected by patents. Brand names are protected too, so it seems strange that no law should be applicable to BTC, if that judge doesn't see it as a currency. Then we shall not see this as a big event. The Japanese government may choose to regulate BTC at some time, and that would change that ruling.

[cozk]

Most probably a retarded first instance judge.

[EternalWingsofGod]

http://www.coindesk.com/tokyo-court-bitcoin-not-subject-to-ownership-2/

Judge Masumi Kurachi ruled that, due to their intangible nature and reliance on third parties, bitcoins cannot be covered under existing law.

This is quite awesome. Set up exchanges, set up payment processors, set up whatever you want with Bitcoin in Japan. It is not covered under the law.

That is a strange ruling, the court must not have the laws and mechanisms to cover it
Off to the government it goes.

[futurebit640]

http://www.coindesk.com/tokyo-court-bitcoin-not-subject-to-ownership-2/

Judge Masumi Kurachi ruled that, due to their intangible nature and reliance on third parties, bitcoins cannot be covered under existing law.

This is quite awesome. Set up exchanges, set up payment processors, set up whatever you want with Bitcoin in Japan. It is not covered under the law.

After witnessing what happened with Mtgox i would think everyone would be running away from unregulated exchanges in Japan.

[allthingsluxury]

Wow, this is great news, good work Japan! Way to move a massive step in the right direction and thanks for sharing the article.

[franky1]

the little snippet in the news has been over exaggerated.. judges do not create regulations.. governments do.
in civil court its meaningless to even pretend that what a judge says will change anything, they just dont have the power.

the real story has nothing to do with japanese regulation, past or future.. it just means a guy lost the case because he couldnt make the judge understand how accountable kerpeles was.

 

[robertgoss]

wouldnt this make people use bitcoin in a bad way to ?  but yea all in all its good thing .. atleast some country is understanding how it works

[Kprawn]

This change came after the MtGox fiasko, so what laws existed at the time it happened? ....Surely those laws are applicable to the MtGox case. Is this change back dated?

* The yakuza pachinko games are not defined as gambling... It closely resemble the principle where kids play arcade type games for tokens, and these tokens can be exchanged for toys and sweets.

How lucky can one guy be? ---> Mark Karpeles .... This surely opens up a world of opportunities for criminals to exploit this loophole in Japan. 

[S4VV4S]

Does this mean that you can freely open bitcoin casinos in japan, a country where gambling is strictly illegal except yakuza pachinko parlors?

Definitely, I am sure the Yakuza wont mind

does this mean anything for the mtgox trial?

If Bitcoin cannot be covered under the existing law then Mark Karples cannot be prosecuted for stealing all those Bitcoins under the existing law. He can only be prosecuted for embezzling the fiat from customer's accounts. I'm eager to hear what they will charge him with. If he doesn't get charged for stealing Bitcoins then there will be a huge influx of Bitcoin exchange hackers into Japan.

I too am very curious to see how this unfolds.

So with no ownership over bitcoin, I'd expect cryptocurrencies to never be widespread in Japan. Then again, we don't know hoe valid this order is and how seriously is going to be regarded.

The only thing you need to own a bitcoin is to hold the private key. The government cannot do anything to change that basic fact.

But then again, what happens if you can't pursue third party services for stealing your bitcoins, overcharging etc. I don't see Japan being a good place to start a bitcoin related business after this.

Use multisig?

I don't see any difference with what is already happening with regards to that matter.
And that is, exchanges claiming they have been "hacked", if you know what I mean