September 27, 2011 U.S.Department of the Treasury might regulate BitCoin

[Rassah]

Forgive me for getting a little off topic, but it is because of a preponderance of regulations such as this that the U.S. economy will remain in a recession for the foreseeable future.  Who wants to bother starting a business (or engaging in any commerce, really) when you have to comply with myriad regulations and have to be continually leery of missteps that can land you in prison?  It's much easier to just stay at home and collect a check from the government.

I would say the biggest cause is uncertainty. Businesses hate uncertainty more than they hate regulation, and with the constant political b*tching going on with threatened gov. shutdowns, debt ceilings, and whatever else is coming this Fall, I'd blame the current economic state of affairs directly on the House/Senate, rather than anything that's already been passed into law.

[Trader Steve]

Since when anyone in US cares about The Constitution? I thought there are like dozens of current and enforced laws which are clearly in direct violation of The Constitution. Anyone would like to list top 100?

So True.

[kgo]

According to this new ruling, companies, organizations as well as individuals must register in order to legally transact with any parties, providing quite privacy invasive contact information on each individual transacted with as well as keep those records for 5 years.

What do you think would be a good way to insure that this ruling does not apply to Bitcoin?

The use of bitcoin is an exercise of free speech and as such is protected by the 1st amendment to the US constitution.  Any law that would interfere with the use of bitcoin is in direct contradiction to this amendment.

I don't see how sending or receiving of bitcoins would constitute free speech.

[Nesetalis]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

[smoothie]

If that was true...sell bitcoins and buy namecoins.

[nmat]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

Dollar transactions are strings of bytes communicated between banks Bitcoin is a currency. It isn't free speech.

I think someone with easy access to a lawyer should check out if this applies to bitcoin or not (or maybe contact FinCEN directly).

[Rassah]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

Dollar transactions are strings of bytes communicated between banks Bitcoin is a currency. It isn't free speech.

I think someone with easy access to a lawyer should check out if this applies to bitcoin or not (or maybe contact FinCEN directly).

Well, according to the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, money == speech...

[hugolp]

Since when anyone in US cares about The Constitution? I thought there are like dozens of current and enforced laws which are clearly in direct violation of The Constitution. Anyone would like to list top 100?

"The constitution is just a piece of paper"

George Bush

[nhodges]

You do realize that, in your example, BitProxy cannot operate legally, right? If you take bitcoins from someone without knowing his/her personal details, you are doing an illegal trade.

But it is arguable that the signature generated from their private key is indeed identifiable and unique detail. It's the damned if you do, damned if you don't situation all over again. You can fight both sides of this case, but whoever has more money will win in court.

[BioMike]

Last month FinCEN issued a ruling that was intended to clarify the definition of an MSB and includes the possibility that even businesses outside the U.S. conducting money transfer over the Internet could still be classified as U.S. MSBs.  Additionally, the definition no longer requires that an MSB be a business — any individual who receives funds in exchange for a stored value might be considered an MSB.

I'm no lawyer, but reading this gives me the following question: if I (in Europe) sell bitcoins (over internet == USA) to some other European person for money... I have to report it to FinCEN?

Plus, op topic, FinCEN can't track EVERY transaction, so seems a bit impractical to me. So what prevents people from civil disobedience?

[wareen]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

Right - no data packet can be illegal so luckily there will never be any crime on the Internet

While I don't think freedom of speech can be successfully applied to Bitcoin, I'm not so sure if it is easy to cover Bitcoin with any conventional definition of "pre-paid financial instruments" either.

Note that Germany has passed a similar law, which might also apply to Bitcoin.

I beg to differ - a German attorney came to the conclusion that under current jurisdiction, Bitcoin is not a currency but a commodity. According to this thread, Germany's Federal Financial Supervisory Authority also stated in a response to a lawyer of a forum member that Bitcoins are specifically not "e-Geld" (e-money) and as such do not fall under the recently proposed anti money laundering draft law 317/11 you're probably referring to.

I personally expect Bitcoin exchanges to be regulated soon but merchants accepting Bitcoins as payments or individuals paying with Bitcoins will most probably not be covered by any conventional laws (ie. laws not specifically crafted for P2P cryptocurrencies) for the foreseeable future.

[RogerR]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

Dollar transactions are strings of bytes communicated between banks Bitcoin is a currency. It isn't free speech.

I think someone with easy access to a lawyer should check out if this applies to bitcoin or not (or maybe contact FinCEN directly).

I doubt this is correct. Interbank data transmissions are contracts to commit assets stored at central clearing organizations to be deposited at counterparty accounts within said clearing organizations. They may be similar to a currency, but they are not the same.

Let me give you a short example: If Clearstream (a central European clearing house) was to lose it's credibility tomorrow, the stored money/assets would still be valuable, but the Clearstream transmissions themselves could easily be considered worthless.

Not a contract lawer though, but this is my impression as a former Fixed Income trader who actually had to deal with the bank liquidity business before.

[kgo]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

So modern day money-laundering is free speech too?  Because the same argument applies to bank transfers.

[bitrebel]

No matter what you think or want to argue, bit coin is NOT "pre-paid financial instruments".

So Bitcoins cannot be legally included in this definition or this law. It applies to all items used to store DOLLAR value. Even when you buy WOW gold, it's still denominated in dollars. Bitcoins are not dollars, so therefore items that utilize bitcoins exclusively are not included in US legislation of this kind.

da judge has spoken

[JoelKatz]

bitcoins are information, strings of bytes. That is communicated from one computer to another through the network..
thats how it falls under free speech.

If that were true, "I'll give you $50,000 if you kill my wife" would be lawful speech as well, but we know it's not.

[nhodges]

I don't see how sending or receiving of bitcoins would constitute free speech.

Maybe if we called each other up on the phone and spoke the hashes 

Can you say charged for conspiracy to defraud the US Treasury? 

[BTC_Junkie]

So even disregarding its application to bitcoins.... you will need to show ID to buy an amazon.com gift card?

[nmat]

So even disregarding its application to bitcoins.... you will need to show ID to buy an amazon.com gift card?

Now that's a relevant question. If so, amazon gift cards will get extremely unpopular.

[Exonumia]

I understood the main reason for this legislation was to close the anonymous pre-paid phone accounts... that is they are not happy that you can use a phone without it being tied to your name/address. The whole thing is silly, however, as those with criminal intent will just use others credentials to purchase.

[ctoon6]

I think its time we set up a decentralized information network with wireless mesh.