Why ‘Tokyo court ruling that bitcoin is not subject to ownership’ isn’t as worry

[bitcoinsolicitor]

A few days ago a Japanese court ruled that bitcoins lost through Mt. Gox’s collapse are not subject to ownership on a relevant case. While there’s still some uncertainty surrounding this ruling the reaction that followed is interesting to say the least.

http://www.selachii.co.uk/solicitors-blog/why-tokyo-court-ruling-that-bitcoin-is-not-subject-to-ownership-isnt-as-worrying-as-it-sounds/

[1715082194]

1715082194

[1715082194]

1715082194

[1715082194]

1715082194

[1715082194]

1715082194

[1715082194]

1715082194

[vladmamedov657]

I think there are still many global problems in terms of Finance. Although it may not be so

[Gozie51]

http://www.selachii.co.uk/solicitors-blog/why-tokyo-court-ruling-that-bitcoin-is-not-subject-to-ownership-isnt-as-worrying-as-it-sounds/

Something is wrong with this link or at the time I tried opening on it. We should endeavor to be certain of the link we post here please so as we don't ignorantly expose users to phishing sites.

[goaldigger]

Ownership has a bold definition and also means a lot of paper works to be proven and bitcoin does not have those. Bitcoin's lack of direction or uncertainty makes it harder to hold. If Tokyo government will make it as something to be owned then they should make bitcoin centralized to make it in the right process. Its also be a hassle to both parties because its a contradictory to what bitcoin really is which is being decentralized.

[CryptoBry]

One of the definition of ownership is control. Now, in the case of Bitcoin although it is digital in nature control is quite possible and we can spend or transfer it whenever we wanted to. I understand that this case resulted from the Mt Gox fiasco and we have to understand that this remains to be one of the most complicated thing to handle. Eventually over time, things will get clearer for the ownership of Bitcoin and other related matters. I hope they can elevate this case to a higher court that can clarify vague areas of the ruling.