The Bitcoin Foundation - Comments on the Coinlab/Mt Gox Lawsuit

[BCB]

i. Gavin Andresen, Bitcoin Developer residing or doing business in Amherst, MA, USA.
https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5509626

ii. Peter Vessenes, CEO of CoinLab and residing or doing business in Bainbridge Island, WA, USA.
http://coinlab.com/status

iii. Charles Shrem, CEO of BitInstant residing or doing business in Brooklyn, NY, USA.


iv. Roger Ver, CEO of MemoryDealers residing or doing business in Santa Clara, CA, USA.
https://109.201.133.65/index.php?topic=193922.msg2013531#msg2013531

v. Patrick Murck, Principal at Engage Legal, PLLC residing or doing business in Washington, DC, USA.


vi. Mark Karpeles, CEO of MtGox.com and residing or doing business in Tokyo, Japan.
https://mtgox.com/pdf/20130503_coinlab_lawsuit.pdf

vii. Satoshi Nakamoto, at satoshin@gmx.com, author of the white paper “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” published on http://bitcoin.org and owner of the PGP Public Key with fingerprint: 5EC948A1.
(founding member-- REALLY??)  how so??  - anyway not comment from him either.

UPDATE:
Jon Matonis - Board Member (from Twitter)
https://twitter.com/jonmatonis

jonmatonis 3 May
@BTCBROKER I think you mean CoinLab. As I am on the board & the foundation is still considering the matter, I will have to defer commenting.
Jon Matonis ‏@jonmatonis 3 May
@BTCBROKER Statement for now is that foundation will take steps that are in the best interest of bitcoin, not individual board members.

UDATE: posting by Jon Matonis on the foundation blog.
https://bitcoinfoundation.org/blog/?p=180

Did I miss anything (else).

[WikileaksDude]

We def need peter venessess to resign.

[epetroel]

We def need peter venessess to resign.

Curious, why Peter and not Mark? 

From what I know (limited as it is) MtGox US customers were supposed to transition to CoinLab.  It seems MtGox is holding up the process and CoinLab is suing.  Granted that's just CoinLab's side of the story, but we all knew this transition was supposed to happen and the fact that it hasn't yet gives some credibility to CoinLab's claim.

Could be that Gox has a good reason for not doing this, but they haven't been forthcoming about it.  Given that they are also stonewalling on the Bitcoinica Liquidator and have a history of being somewhat less than transparent on other issues, I'm tempted to side with CoinLab here.  Again, this is just based on what I know now - the actual facts could be different of course.

[jubalix]

i. Gavin Andresen, Bitcoin Developer residing or doing business in Amherst, MA, USA.
https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5509626

ii. Peter Vessenes, CEO of CoinLab and residing or doing business in Bainbridge Island, WA, USA.
http://coinlab.com/status

iii. Charles Shrem, CEO of BitInstant residing or doing business in Brooklyn, NY, USA.


iv. Roger Ver, CEO of MemoryDealers residing or doing business in Santa Clara, CA, USA.
https://109.201.133.65/index.php?topic=193922.msg2013531#msg2013531

v. Patrick Murck, Principal at Engage Legal, PLLC residing or doing business in Washington, DC, USA.


vi. Mark Karpeles, CEO of MtGox.com and residing or doing business in Tokyo, Japan.
https://mtgox.com/pdf/20130503_coinlab_lawsuit.pdf

vii. Satoshi Nakamoto, at satoshin@gmx.com, author of the white paper “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System” published on http://bitcoin.org and owner of the PGP Public Key with fingerprint: 5EC948A1.
(founding member-- REALLY??)  how so??  - anyway not comment from him either.

Did I miss anything.

wow  this is almost Shakespearean farce/tragedy/Hurbris and makes it looks like Hamlet ended on a relatively positive note

Roll a dice and Match the comment to the maker

>>(much better than using guns, by the way) is this a dystopian prediction for 20 years hence (also the Universe would be much better run from Git Hub, I'm sure that's how the 10 commandments came were pulled down)


>>my biggest hope is that Mt. Gox does an excellent job keeping Bitcoiners safe and liquid and trading on the exchange. (but I am suing them for 75$M and sold of alot of BTC before filing, and am buying some back now, as I type...I think I even out-printed Ben for a couple of minutes)


>>WTF no one tells me anything


>>They Did what now, I will just acknowledge this that will work....OH I just effectively acknowledged service myself....removing yet another barrier to being sued, and saving postage to Japan for the plaintiff


>>I got out of the Cluster F546 years ago, and they still exhume my ghost in here.....taking my name in vain

[cypherdoc]

All this stuff is nothing compared to the dump of 2011.

we were dead and buried down at 2 and I was buying like hell

[BCB]

All this stuff is nothing compared to the dump of 2011.

we were dead and buried down at 2 and I was buying like hell

so you are fucking LOADED!  What's your point.  Ha!

[repentance]

We def need peter venessess to resign.

Curious, why Peter and not Mark? 

If you're going to require one to step down then you need to require both to step down (and not replace them with anyone who has an interest in the lawsuit).  The Foundation should not be seen to be endorsing one side of a legal dispute to which it is not a party over another.

That said, the dispute is between two corporate entities and not the individuals who serve on the board of Bitcoin Foundation.  Legal disputes such as this one are extremely common in emerging sectors (see Linux Foundation history) and we're going to see more of them.  Should people who are engaged in Bitcoin related litigation be excluded from "community" roles?  I'm not entirely convinced they should.

[BCB]

The Linux Foundation history of litigation has been made else where.

https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5509626

I'm not familiar with the history, but it can't be beneficial.

[gweedo]

The Linux Foundation history of litigation has been made else where.

https://gist.github.com/gavinandresen/5509626

I'm not familiar with the history, but it can't be beneficial.

He is talking about the companies, and when you have 100's of companies yeah that is what happens. But when it is the first year of the foundation and their is a lawsuit, that isn't good. I love how they compare it to the linux foundation, but it is very different from the linux foundation. This is money, not an Operating system or just any piece of software. This is a currency and they are imploding on themselves.

[charleshoskinson]

I will repost what I said on the foundation boards:

Me

I have to point out that this conduct is utterly disgraceful. We are not the linux foundation with Linus at the helm and megacorporations tied to the security and well-being of our product. The Bitcoin Foundation is small and heavily underfunded for the tasks it is seeking to accomplish. To have one board member sue another who happens to control the largest means of currency exchange for 75 million dollars without any forewarning or joint statement to the members of this foundation is beyond common sense.

How can Peter and Mark successfully execute their duties? This isn't AMD and Intel arguing over a patent. If Peter wins his lawsuit, then Mtgox will fold. If Mark wins, then how exactly will Peter explain to his investors that he spent their money on a failed legal venture? There is already a bank run at Mtgox with hundreds of people trying to pull out.I wouldn't be surprised to see fractional reserve rumors come soon -anonymously of course. The whole thing smells really dirty and it makes me sad.

Honestly, what I am most upset about is that you guys aren't asking for Peter and Mark to temporarily step down until this issue has been properly managed. Is there even a media plan at this point? Come on guys.

From Gavin:

I like the Linux model better, with lots of developers at lots of different companies (and some independent) contributing.

Me

That works well because corporations make money off of linux and thus have an incentive to contribute. Governments use linux and thus wish to keep it secure.We need to get bitcoin past some threshold that will make corporations comfortable investing dev resources to build products on top of bitcoin. For example, Facebook could become the largest online wallet provider in the world. It could effectively kill kickstarter and revolutionize the donation model for non-profits.

Some entity with credibility needs to court them into committing to a beta test. I disagree that we could replicate the linux model completely because we have no leader. Satoshi doesn't want to be Linus, which is his right, yet it means decisions end up getting made without any community consensus.

John Smith:

The Linux Foundation may have plenty of lawsuits between companies but we're not quite the Linux Foundation yet. Bitcoin is still very small. Also Linux has very little to lose from one of the companies in the Linux Foundation going under.

But for Bitcoin this kind of infighting at this stage is unacceptable and hurts people's trust. There's a lot more at stake here. $75 million is not pocket change even for MtGox. Are the people with deposits at MtGox at risk?

Member corporations sueing each other for money is a negative sum game, and it certainly looks like a conflict of interest to me with the goal of the Bitcoin Foundation.

[jubalix]

I will repost what I said on the foundation boards:

Me

I have to point out that this conduct is utterly disgraceful. We are not the linux foundation with Linus at the helm and megacorporations tied to the security and well-being of our product. The Bitcoin Foundation is small and heavily underfunded for the tasks it is seeking to accomplish. To have one board member sue another who happens to control the largest means of currency exchange for 75 million dollars without any forewarning or joint statement to the members of this foundation is beyond common sense.

How can Peter and Mark successfully execute their duties? This isn't AMD and Intel arguing over a patent. If Peter wins his lawsuit, then Mtgox will fold. If Mark wins, then how exactly will Peter explain to his investors that he spent their money on a failed legal venture? There is already a bank run at Mtgox with hundreds of people trying to pull out.I wouldn't be surprised to see fractional reserve rumors come soon -anonymously of course. The whole thing smells really dirty and it makes me sad.

Honestly, what I am most upset about is that you guys aren't asking for Peter and Mark to temporarily step down until this issue has been properly managed. Is there even a media plan at this point? Come on guys.

From Gavin:

I like the Linux model better, with lots of developers at lots of different companies (and some independent) contributing.

Me

That works well because corporations make money off of linux and thus have an incentive to contribute. Governments use linux and thus wish to keep it secure.We need to get bitcoin past some threshold that will make corporations comfortable investing dev resources to build products on top of bitcoin. For example, Facebook could become the largest online wallet provider in the world. It could effectively kill kickstarter and revolutionize the donation model for non-profits.

Some entity with credibility needs to court them into committing to a beta test. I disagree that we could replicate the linux model completely because we have no leader. Satoshi doesn't want to be Linus, which is his right, yet it means decisions end up getting made without any community consensus.

John Smith:

The Linux Foundation may have plenty of lawsuits between companies but we're not quite the Linux Foundation yet. Bitcoin is still very small. Also Linux has very little to lose from one of the companies in the Linux Foundation going under.

But for Bitcoin this kind of infighting at this stage is unacceptable and hurts people's trust. There's a lot more at stake here. $75 million is not pocket change even for MtGox. Are the people with deposits at MtGox at risk?

Member corporations sueing each other for money is a negative sum game, and it certainly looks like a conflict of interest to me with the goal of the Bitcoin Foundation.

fractional reserve rumors come soon...

really wow....that's....just wow... I'd love to know the estimated CRR....1000:1?

also it's funny how people want to be led so badly

This may suggest BTC going the way of the Betamax.

[charleshoskinson]

No response from Peter. I guess we don't deserve a comment.

[charleshoskinson]

Actually you do not deserve a comment. A bunch of suckers have started a witch hunt because you are afraid that your 1 BTC will temporarily fall by 10% because your precious centralized exchange is being sued for breach of contract rightly or wrongly do not deserve  a comment.

If a party feels it was wronged why do you want to deny them justice?

There is a right and wrong way to do things. Peter and Mark are the two most powerful members of the bitcoin foundation due to their financial ties and respective businesses. Now they have entered into a sum zero suit that will result in the destruction of one of them and damage the brand of bitcoin. It may even destroy the foundation we paid money to join.

Now I feel entitled to a fucking statement. At the very least an explanation how the hell Peter and Mark are going to work together on the same board. It's like a surgeon operating a patient who is actively suing him for malpractice. I'm sorry some things shouldn't be done. Peter and Mark should resign.

[charleshoskinson]

That is internal biz of that foundation. Perhaps it was a bad idea to pay someone loads of money for membership of an exclusive club if two members of club suing each other is the end of it.

I for once do not have any regrets ignoring this "foundation" from the get go.

The foundation needs to go and we need something else.

[jubalix]

That is internal biz of that foundation. Perhaps it was a bad idea to pay someone loads of money for membership of an exclusive club if two members of club suing each other is the end of it.

I for once do not have any regrets ignoring this "foundation" from the get go.

sorta gone beyond internal, with public law suits and statements

[BCB]

I wouldn't call peter venessess powerful.  Who is he again??

[MPOE-PR]

That is internal biz of that foundation. Perhaps it was a bad idea to pay someone loads of money for membership of an exclusive club if two members of club suing each other is the end of it.

I for once do not have any regrets ignoring this "foundation" from the get go.

The foundation needs to go and we need something else.

How about it just stays in its proper place? Ie, some club some people participate in.

I wouldn't call peter venessess powerful.  Who is he again??

Last anyone checked, he was both the CEO and Treasurer of the foundation thingie.

[BCB]

I wouldn't call peter venessess powerful.  Who is he again??

Last anyone checked, he was both the CEO and Treasurer of the foundation thingie.

And before that he was what???

[MPOE-PR]

I wouldn't call peter venessess powerful.  Who is he again??

Last anyone checked, he was both the CEO and Treasurer of the foundation thingie.

And before that he was what???

Before that he was a proud participant in the Ycombinator freakshow.

[BCB]

updated original post with Board Member Jon Matonis public comments.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=194295.msg2016417#msg2016417

Has Charlie Shrem or Roger Ver commented anywhere yet?

Thx.