Will Bitcoins soon be outlawed everywhere if called a currency ?

[cloud9]

The poster's comments are solely his opinion, in a forum like this we do not need to give you permission to have your own opinion - it's a requirement.  We are not rendering any service of any kind - but expressing individual opinion.  This is a universal disclaimer for all posts of Cloud9 made on this forum.

Bitcoin P2P Crypto-Commodity

OK, so Bitcoin is a medium of exchange.  No one can question that.  And it seems a very effective medium of exchange.  

But is it a currency?  Is it money, backed by a store of value to be redeemable from the issuer giving the issuer no option not to accept it to be redeemed?  Or is it a secure accounting utility with a user allocated value due to market forces?

Can a Bitcoin site (bitcoin.org) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin a currency or not - because it has a decentralized nature?

Can a Bitcoin site (mtgox.com) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin an internet commodity or not - because it has a decentralized nature?

Can every Bitcoin holder, merchant, trader, etc. decide individually how they interpret Bitcoins?

Does Bitcoin allow for modern day barter transactions between the fairly secure Bitcoin Accounting Utility and a good/service?

See this legal ideas with regards to barter exchange as opposed to virtual currency (Scroll down to the end to Matthew C 's answer):

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/law-legal/corporate-law/finance-securities-law/LAW_COR_FSL/46277-12027705

Can Bitcoin be interpreted as an internet utility which can be bartered for any number of goods/services/other?

Is bitcoin.org 's blatant misrepresentation of Bitcoin not misleading?

"P2P Virtual Currency
Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer currency. Peer-to-peer means that no central authority issues new money or tracks transactions. These tasks are managed collectively by the network."

"... no central authority ... tracks transactions ... " - Can anyone not track transactions on the blockchain (provided Bitcoin was not laundered - and laundering Bitcoin would be illegal)?

P2P Virtual Currency - Does a currency not require a store of value backing it?

Does Bitcoin's only value derive from its secure, transferable utility value as an internet commodity described by MtGox?  Have we bought an internet commodity that we are bartering for goods/services/other as a medium of exchange?  Or have we been issued a virtual currency with a backed store of value - to be redeemed, without option not to accept, from the backing entity on demand?

Would "P2P Crypto Accounting Utility" not be a more aptly description?  Would it not be less incriminating to bitcoin.org 's author who identifies his Bitcoins as currency - even though it is not backed, or redeemable from an entity, without option not to accept?

[1714599838]

1714599838

[1714599838]

1714599838

[1714599838]

1714599838

[1714599838]

1714599838

[1714599838]

1714599838

[1714599838]

1714599838

[em3rgentOrdr]

I like to call bitcoin "a distributed time-stamp network".  It just so happens that because of human action and economic forces that it acts as a currency, functionally.

[cloud9]

I like to call bitcoin "a distributed time-stamp network".  It just so happens that because of human action and economic forces that it acts as a currency, functionally.

Can Bitcoin be called currency by decree, as announced on bitcoin.org which seems to be kind of authoritative about Bitcoin and also usually the first place people are introduced to Bitcoin?

Would a more neutral stand point / opinion of bitcoin.org not be more suitable?

Even though it is used as a medium of exchange in the same sense as marbles on the playground, or corporate perks, loyalty points, any liquid barter good, etc. etc.

[Timo Y]

Semantics semantics. Yawn.

It's also called e-mail even though it isn't literally mail.

Who cares? Really?

[DATA COMMANDER]

Semantics semantics. Yawn.

It's also called e-mail even though it isn't literally mail.

Who cares? Really?

/thread

[cloud9]

Semantics semantics. Yawn.

It's also called e-mail even though it isn't literally mail.

Who cares? Really?

Semantics is what a court of law is all about.  Books and books of it.  If you sell / issue me a currency - certain expectations goes with it, isn't there a promise accompanying a currency, a promise to be upheld?  If I barter a goat for your pig - that is where the transfer ends - just at that.

[em3rgentOrdr]

Semantics semantics. Yawn.

It's also called e-mail even though it isn't literally mail.

Who cares? Really?

Get your weapons ready, connect to google and wikipedia, ready your fingers on your keyboard, and prepare for INTERNET FORUM SEMANTICS BATTLE!!!

[Insert SEMANTICS argument below]

[benjamindees]

If you sell / issue me a currency - certain expectations goes with it, isn't there a promise accompanying a currency, a promise to be upheld?

Really?  What expectation?  What promise?

[SgtSpike]

OK, so Bitcoin is a medium of exchange.  No one can question that.  And it seems a very effective medium of exchange.  

But is it a currency?  Is it money, backed by a store of value to be redeemable from the issuer giving the issuer no option not to accept it to be redeemed?  Or is it a secure accounting utility with a user allocated value due to market forces?
Is the USD?  No.  That doesn't stop it from being used as a currency.  Currencies, from a functional standpoint, simply facilitate a more efficient form of barter.

Can a Bitcoin site (bitcoin.org) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin a currency or not - because it has a decentralized nature?
Does it matter whether a site considers it a currency?  If you consider it a currency, use it as one.  Otherwise, don't.

Can a Bitcoin site (mtgox.com) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin an internet commodity or not - because it has a decentralized nature?
Does it matter whether a site considers it a currency?  If you consider it a currency, use it as one.  Otherwise, don't.

Can every Bitcoin holder, merchant, trader, etc. decide individually how they interpret Bitcoins?
Absolutely.  It's a form of payment that each individual can decide to accept or refuse as payment.

Does Bitcoin allow for modern day barter transactions between the fairly secure Bitcoin Accounting Utility and a good/service?
Yes... lots of such trades are happening all the time.

See this legal ideas with regards to barter exchange as opposed to virtual currency (Scroll down to the end to Matthew C 's answer):

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/law-legal/corporate-law/finance-securities-law/LAW_COR_FSL/46277-12027705

Can Bitcoin be interpreted as an internet utility which can be bartered for any number of goods/services/other?
Sure, I don't see why not.

Is bitcoin.org 's blatant misrepresentation of Bitcoin not misleading?
Yes it is misleading.

"P2P Virtual Currency
Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer currency. Peer-to-peer means that no central authority issues new money or tracks transactions. These tasks are managed collectively by the network."

"... no central authority ... tracks transactions ... " - Can anyone not track transactions on the blockchain (provided Bitcoin was not laundered - and laundering Bitcoin would be illegal)?
It can be tracked.

P2P Virtual Currency - Does a currency not require a store of value backing it?
No.  It only needs to have value in the eyes of those using it.

Does Bitcoin's only value derive from its secure, transferable utility value as an internet commodity described by MtGox?  Have we bought an internet commodity that we are bartering for goods/services/other as a medium of exchange?  Or have we been issued a virtual currency with a backed store of value - to be redeemed, without option not to accept, from the backing entity on demand?.
There's no backing entity.  Bitcoins are not backed by anything.  Consider them a commodity or consider them a currency, but really, it could be classified as either one.  The hope is to move fully into it being a currency.

Would "P2P Crypto Accounting Utility" not be a more aptly description?  Would it not be less incriminating to bitcoin.org 's author who identifies his Bitcoins as currency - even though it is not backed, or redeemable from an entity, without option not to accept?
I think currency makes more sense to people.  It's used as a currency, whether it actually fits the official description of one or not.  Calling it an accounting system makes no functional sense, and would only confuse people.  It MAY be technically correct, but functionally, it is not.

[cloud9]

Wouldn't it be illegal in most parts of the world to issue currency backed by an empty promise?

If I bought an internet commodity however at MtGox, called Bitcoin, and it is known to have fairly secure properties as an accounting utility, wouln't that be legal in most parts of the world if I would like to exchange it for goods or services or to sell it?

Really bitcoin.org - see a lawyer about the "currency" thing please.  Are you seeking cheap publicity.  As you are definitely getting it.  For now I will continue to barter my Bitcoin accounting utility which I have bought at MtGox and which I can sell at MtGox if someone wants to buy it or accept it in any barter exchange transaction at the fair market value attributed to my/your Bitcoin accounting utility.  And respectfully everybody - I declare that I am not giving you any currency through the process of our barter, buy or sell transactions - but a Bitcoin secure accounting utility.

[SgtSpike]

Wouldn't it be illegal in most parts of the world to issue currency backed by an empty promise?

If I bought an internet commodity however at MtGox, called Bitcoin, and it is known to have fairly secure properties as an accounting utility, wouln't that be legal in most parts of the world if I would like to exchange it for goods or services or to sell it?

Really bitcoin.org - see a lawyer about the "currency" thing please.  Are you seeking cheap publicity.  As you are definitely getting it.  For now I will continue to barter my Bitcoin accounting utility which I have bought at MtGox and which I can sell at MtGox if someone wants to buy it or accept it in any barter exchange transaction at the fair market value attributed to my/your Bitcoin accounting utility.  And please everybody - I declare that I am not giving you any currency through the process of our barter, buy or sell transactions.

Do show the applicable laws.

[cloud9]

Wouldn't it be illegal in most parts of the world to issue currency backed by an empty promise?

If I bought an internet commodity however at MtGox, called Bitcoin, and it is known to have fairly secure properties as an accounting utility, wouln't that be legal in most parts of the world if I would like to exchange it for goods or services or to sell it?

Really bitcoin.org - see a lawyer about the "currency" thing please.  Are you seeking cheap publicity.  As you are definitely getting it.  For now I will continue to barter my Bitcoin accounting utility which I have bought at MtGox and which I can sell at MtGox if someone wants to buy it or accept it in any barter exchange transaction at the fair market value attributed to my/your Bitcoin accounting utility.  And please everybody - I declare that I am not giving you any currency through the process of our barter, buy or sell transactions.

Do show the applicable laws.

If there aren't any in the world (which I doubt), they can be made any day.  You would need to go a long way to convince people that barter has suddenly turned illegal.

[benjamindees]

You haven't posted any definition of what you think a "currency" even is.  You haven't posted any laws.  Your claims fly in the face of reality since most currencies aren't actually backed by anything.

Your proposals wrt "accounting commodity" and "utility" have glaring holes in that no one actually guarantees any of these properties and in fact no one would ever be able to.

So while I think you aren't actually one of the DOJ trolls that frequent this forum, somehow you have managed to be worse, and make even less sense, and spew even more confusion and stupidity.  Congratulations.

[cloud9]

Can a Bitcoin site (bitcoin.org) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin a currency or not - because it has a decentralized nature?
Does it matter whether a site considers it a currency?  If you consider it a currency, use it as one.  Otherwise, don't.

Actually they consider it a commodity - very wisely I would say.  Lucky for me I bought my commodity at their site.  No misconceptions of any kind of intended promise were conveyed - it was a simple sales transaction and the secure accounting utility was transfered into my ownership.  When I need to sell some secure accounting utilities at their site, I take it to the market place and the same message is portrayed.

[cloud9]

If you sell / issue me a currency - certain expectations goes with it, isn't there a promise accompanying a currency, a promise to be upheld?

Really?  What expectation?  What promise?

Is it not used to be, that the value in silver/gold will be handed in exchange on presentation to the bearer?

[cloud9]

Bitcoin P2P Crypto-Commodity ...

OK, so Bitcoin is a medium of exchange.  No one can question that.  And it seems a very effective medium of exchange.  

But is it a currency?  Is it money, backed by a store of value to be redeemable from the issuer giving the issuer no option not to accept it to be redeemed?  Or is it a secure accounting utility with a user allocated value due to market forces?
Is the USD?  No.  That doesn't stop it from being used as a currency.  Currencies, from a functional standpoint, simply facilitate a more efficient form of barter.

Can a Bitcoin site (bitcoin.org) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin a currency or not - because it has a decentralized nature?
Does it matter whether a site considers it a currency?  If you consider it a currency, use it as one.  Otherwise, don't.

Can a Bitcoin site (mtgox.com) decide individually whether to call Bitcoin an internet commodity or not - because it has a decentralized nature?
Does it matter whether a site considers it a currency?  If you consider it a currency, use it as one.  Otherwise, don't.

Can every Bitcoin holder, merchant, trader, etc. decide individually how they interpret Bitcoins?
Absolutely.  It's a form of payment that each individual can decide to accept or refuse as payment.

Does Bitcoin allow for modern day barter transactions between the fairly secure Bitcoin Accounting Utility and a good/service?
Yes... lots of such trades are happening all the time.

See this legal ideas with regards to barter exchange as opposed to virtual currency (Scroll down to the end to Matthew C 's answer):

http://www.linkedin.com/answers/law-legal/corporate-law/finance-securities-law/LAW_COR_FSL/46277-12027705

Can Bitcoin be interpreted as an internet utility which can be bartered for any number of goods/services/other?
Sure, I don't see why not.

Is bitcoin.org 's blatant misrepresentation of Bitcoin not misleading?
Yes it is misleading.

"P2P Virtual Currency
Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer currency. Peer-to-peer means that no central authority issues new money or tracks transactions. These tasks are managed collectively by the network."

"... no central authority ... tracks transactions ... " - Can anyone not track transactions on the blockchain (provided Bitcoin was not laundered - and laundering Bitcoin would be illegal)?
It can be tracked.

P2P Virtual Currency - Does a currency not require a store of value backing it?
No.  It only needs to have value in the eyes of those using it.

Does Bitcoin's only value derive from its secure, transferable utility value as an internet commodity described by MtGox?  Have we bought an internet commodity that we are bartering for goods/services/other as a medium of exchange?  Or have we been issued a virtual currency with a backed store of value - to be redeemed, without option not to accept, from the backing entity on demand?.
There's no backing entity.  Bitcoins are not backed by anything.  Consider them a commodity or consider them a currency, but really, it could be classified as either one.  The hope is to move fully into it being a currency.

Would "P2P Crypto Accounting Utility" not be a more aptly description?  Would it not be less incriminating to bitcoin.org 's author who identifies his Bitcoins as currency - even though it is not backed, or redeemable from an entity, without option not to accept?
I think currency makes more sense to people.  It's used as a currency, whether it actually fits the official description of one or not.  Calling it an accounting system makes no functional sense, and would only confuse people.  It MAY be technically correct, but functionally, it is not.

Thanks for your thorough effort at answering these questions.

bitcoin.org: Would Bitcoin P2P Crypto-Commodity be catchy enough for you?  (Although not as sensational?)

Tip:  Search "digital commodity"

[SgtSpike]

I don't understand why you are obsessed with not calling it a currency.  You haven't showed us any of the laws you claim would make a non-backed currency illegal, and bitcoins are being used as a currency, so I don't see any reason to not call it a currency.

[Scientician!]

tl;dr

What do you back the bitcoinzzzzz with?!??11? DERP

Goods and/or services whose value is mutually determined on a per-transaction basis?

[cloud9]

I don't understand why you are obsessed with not calling it a currency.  You haven't showed us any of the laws you claim would make a non-backed currency illegal, and bitcoins are being used as a currency, so I don't see any reason to not call it a currency.

So on what grounds will a Senator be able to shut it down?

With legislation maybe like China did a few years ago with "Virtual Currency"?  But can you do that to unique digital goods/commodity that has ownership and is transferable in a free market system?

Some might say its untraceable? - Only if you launder it - that's illegal - not if you trade/barter a digital good/commodity?

[cloud9]

tl;dr

What do you back the bitcoinzzzzz with?!??11? DERP

Goods and/or services whose value is mutually determined on a per-transaction basis?

Is Bitcoin as a digital commodity's medium of exchange value not reached through barter transactions in a free market system?

Does that make it a backed currency?