Pooled miners may be responsible for facilitating illegal transactions.

[qman]

Question: If pooled miners have a large percentage of the Bitcoin network, wouldn't they be legally responsible for facilitating illegal transactions? 
I think judges would view it in a dim light especially since they profit from it. 
Also, if the pool operators control more than 50% of the network then they can actually stop transactions; that may imply even more legal responsibility.

[1713574625]

1713574625

[1713574625]

1713574625

[1713574625]

1713574625

[MyFarm]

I think that would be a VERY difficult argument to prove in court.  BUT, the issue of pools that are too large remains which is part of the reason I just started a new pool (see sig).

[kinghajj]

Making a block is just doing math. I doubt any court would rule that math is illegal. The exchanges could be held responsible since they actually exchange legal tender for doing math.

[qman]

Making a block is just doing math. I doubt any court would rule that math is illegal. The exchanges could be held responsible since they actually exchange legal tender for doing math.

By your logic, credit cards companies don't have to worry about cards being used for illegal purchases either since it's just doing math.

How is a large pool that ends up processing a large percentage of the transactions not like a credit card company then?

[TraderTimm]

I hear that people have dollars in their pockets that have bought drugs before, or even better, have traces of cocaine on them.

Can't do that with bitcoin

[qman]

I hear that people have dollars in their pockets that have bought drugs before, or even better, have traces of cocaine on them.

Can't do that with bitcoin

Are you comparing a few hundred dollars to an entire credit card company?  As the amount of money gets larger, so does the burden of proof needed to show that it is not ill-gotten.

[TraderTimm]

Are you comparing a few hundred dollars to an entire credit card company?  As the amount of money gets larger, so does the burden of proof needed to show that it is not ill-gotten.

I assure you, it is probably orders of magnitude larger than 'a few hundred dollars'. But as we all know, cash is king when it comes to buying drugs, financing illicit war ops, you know -- all the fun stuff government does.

[qman]

Are you comparing a few hundred dollars to an entire credit card company?  As the amount of money gets larger, so does the burden of proof needed to show that it is not ill-gotten.

I assure you, it is probably orders of magnitude larger than 'a few hundred dollars'. But as we all know, cash is king when it comes to buying drugs, financing illicit war ops, you know -- all the fun stuff government does.

I doubt people really walk around with $30,000 in their pockets.  Also most drugs are paid for by insurance companies and they don't send physical cash.  I've heard the Iraq war could be considered illegal too and I'm sure most of the payments to all of the soldiers and defense contractors are not by physical cash.

[slsls]

This has quickly gotten off topic. Is there anyone with a legal background who has some insight into this?

[clickbangdone]

Question was already asked here no real answer yet
http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=13882.0