Bitcoin and defination of it by government

[amacar2]

If there is no any statement regarding bitcoin in government finance law than buying or selling bitcoin will be considered as illegal or against law?
I think this shouldn't because bitcoin is just a computer program or digital value without any physical fiat supporting it, and if not defined by government everybody should be free to buy and sell this type of computer products.

What you guys think about this?

[bittrojan]

If there is no any statement regarding bitcoin in government finance law than buying or selling bitcoin will be considered as illegal or against law?
I think this shouldn't because bitcoin is just a computer program or digital value without any physical fiat supporting it, and if not defined by government everybody should be free to buy and sell this type of computer products.

What you guys think about this?

I agree with that,bitcoin is computer program and run with internet connection,but the matter for goverment is the regulation and centralize of bitcoin,if we know paypal or other currency have regulation and have official company,so bitcoin not.and this is one of big problem for bitcoin to being accepted in goverment.

[RealBitcoin]

My personal definition of bitcoin is this:

Bitcoin is a digital cryptographically secured asset and decentralized online peer to peer payment system.


You can hardly define it anything else, saying that bitcoin is a commodity or online token is just very uneducated and those bureocrats have no idea what they are talking about.

[NyeFe]

My personal definition of bitcoin is this:

Bitcoin is a digital cryptographically secured asset and decentralized online peer to peer payment system.


You can hardly define it anything else, saying that bitcoin is a commodity or online token is just very uneducated and those bureocrats have no idea what they are talking about.

I like your definition.

If I could extend it, it would be:

Bitcoin is an offline, cryptographically secured digital asset and decentralized online peer to peer payment system.

[Slark]

This problem is not only with finding the ideal bitcoin definition but with internet/digital revolution of recent years and inventions/threats it brought.

We still have outdated laws, we don't know how to react to things people do and say over the internet. If someone can be legally punished for threats spouted over net?

Where is the borderline?

Can we be prosecuted for 'stealing' something that is widely available online and you can grab it with one click (music, art, movies)?

Bitcoin is in grey area of law - because it is new concept and old lawyers and bureaucrats who usually invent new act have no idea how to classify it.

[RealBitcoin]

Bitcoin is an offline, cryptographically secured digital asset and decentralized online peer to peer payment system.

Bitcoin is a sovereign and standalone cryptographically secured digital asset and a decentralized online peer to peer payment system protocol.


(But we can really add infinite adjectives to it, but it always boils down to the same conclusion)

[Superbitzz]

i think there is no a sing government in the world who have yet accepted bitcoin. i think the time is comming with the governments will accept them.

[franky1]

1) governments cannot abolish bitcoin
2) its defined as an asset, though some governments have naively thought its a commodity(fail on them)

the only thing governments can do is:
control registered businesses on their land who want to use it
control users on their land who want to use it in combination with their FIAT.

in short if your business is registered in america and your using dollars in swaps for bitcoin. then expect the business to be monitored and the dollar movements monitored.
in short if your business is registered in europe and your using euro's in swaps for bitcoin. then expect the business to be monitored and the euro movements monitored.
in short if you are just holding bitcoin. not breaking any drugs laws, or other human crimes. then bitcoin is just bitcoin. and nothing can be done

[shinratensei_]

If there is no any statement regarding bitcoin in government finance law than buying or selling bitcoin will be considered as illegal or against law?
I think this shouldn't because bitcoin is just a computer program or digital value without any physical fiat supporting it, and if not defined by government everybody should be free to buy and sell this type of computer products.

What you guys think about this?

The government thinks bitcoin it's not an only computer program or digital currency but in many criminal cases bitcoin is always involved and the government will think bitcoin is a part of the criminal cases.

[Carlton Banks]

The source code literally is the definition of Bitcoin. No other definition has any relevance.

The OP makes a fallacious observation, but it's understandable these days: governments simply don't have the leverage over what is and isn't illegal that most seem to think, and the continuation of the decentralised technology trend will only underline their ineffectiveness at managing human populations.

Peer-to-peer computer software is the most efficient and the most powerful form of individual rights tool that has ever existed: it's already abolished scarcity in music & video recordings (as well as much of the over-inflated profits those industries used to make).

In Bitcoin, it's set to abolish the power of the central banks, possibly the most pernicious institution in human history (to my mind, there is no question). Major changes to the monetary system have been historically pretty torrid eras, I doubt anyone is prepared for the disruption this particular changing of the guard will cause, I'm not ready, I know that. Hold tight.