Roger Ver to be sued for defrauding bitcoin newbies.

[susuberuang]

yes it seems roger ver try hard to make the name of bitcoin cash into bitcoin so i can see the core of the desire roger ver is trying to replace bitcoin position to bitcoin cash in my opinion it is very horrible because it makes new players misguided about the difference of bitcoin and bitcoin cash.

[1714067061]

1714067061

[1714067061]

1714067061

[1714067061]

1714067061

[Zin-Zang]

yes it seems roger ver try hard to make the name of bitcoin cash into bitcoin so i can see the core of the desire roger ver is trying to replace bitcoin position to bitcoin cash in my opinion it is very horrible because it makes new players misguided about the difference of bitcoin and bitcoin cash.

Guy ,  the wallet down load supports Cash & Core, did you even bother to look at his site before making up lies.
Waybackmachine confirmed it say the same back in Jan.

Or were you too lazy to even read the post directly above yours.  

[JollyGood]

Did you actually bother to download the wallet before you make blanket statements.
Because I just looked at the wallet download and it states

Supports both Bitcoin Cash & Bitcoin Core

Switch between the two currencies effortlessly.

And before anyone tries to lie, it said the exact same thing according to the wayback machine on Jan 23rd, 2018
https://web.archive.org/web/20180123072152/https://wallet.bitcoin.com/

So it always stated it supported both Cash & Core and the buy orders always took you offsite to an exchange where you had to register with the exchange and choose which coin you wanted.

Those so called lawsuits guys are some of the biggest damn idiots , I have ever seen.  Everything was clearly spelled out CASH or CORE.

bitcoin.com is owned by Ver and he is using that domain to deliberately NOT clarify the position between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash thus creating confusion for newbies and some experienced users.

[Zin-Zang]

Did you actually bother to download the wallet before you make blanket statements.
Because I just looked at the wallet download and it states

Supports both Bitcoin Cash & Bitcoin Core

Switch between the two currencies effortlessly.

And before anyone tries to lie, it said the exact same thing according to the wayback machine on Jan 23rd, 2018
https://web.archive.org/web/20180123072152/https://wallet.bitcoin.com/

So it always stated it supported both Cash & Core and the buy orders always took you offsite to an exchange where you had to register with the exchange and choose which coin you wanted.

Those so called lawsuits guys are some of the biggest damn idiots , I have ever seen.  Everything was clearly spelled out CASH or CORE.

bitcoin.com is owned by Ver and he is using that domain to deliberately NOT clarify the position between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash thus creating confusion for newbies and some experienced users.

Exactly how, he lists Cash & Core?

Show me 1 Experienced User that claims he was too stupid to know the difference between Cash & Core.
Because I have a hard time believing these people are as stupid as you claim.

I think more likely ,
you have some that just really hate Ver, which means they know the difference, and a few others that just thought they would get a payday from a class action suit, so they lied.

Why you want to claim these people are complete morons is beyond me.

Well the Lawsuit been dropped because it was scam, and any lawyer could tell you it was a losing case.
So who among the supporters of the failed lawsuit, wants to come out of the stupid closet and admit they are a moron,
so we know to bubble wrap them so they don't hurt themselves in future endeavors.  

(Here's Your Sign)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBjelRDKHUk

[JollyGood]

Did you actually bother to download the wallet before you make blanket statements.
Because I just looked at the wallet download and it states

Supports both Bitcoin Cash & Bitcoin Core

Switch between the two currencies effortlessly.

And before anyone tries to lie, it said the exact same thing according to the wayback machine on Jan 23rd, 2018
https://web.archive.org/web/20180123072152/https://wallet.bitcoin.com/

So it always stated it supported both Cash & Core and the buy orders always took you offsite to an exchange where you had to register with the exchange and choose which coin you wanted.

Those so called lawsuits guys are some of the biggest damn idiots , I have ever seen.  Everything was clearly spelled out CASH or CORE.

bitcoin.com is owned by Ver and he is using that domain to deliberately NOT clarify the position between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash thus creating confusion for newbies and some experienced users.

Exactly how, he lists Cash & Core?

Show me 1 Experienced User that claims he was too stupid to know the difference between Cash & Core.
Because I have a hard time believing these people are as stupid as you claim.

I think more likely ,
you have some that just really hate Ver, which means they know the difference, and a few others that just thought they would get a payday from a class action suit, so they lied.

Why you want to claim these people are complete morons is beyond me.

Well the Lawsuit been dropped because it was scam, and any lawyer could tell you it was a losing case.
So who among the supporters of the failed lawsuit, wants to come out of the stupid closet and admit they are a moron,
so we know to bubble wrap them so they don't hurt themselves in future endeavors.  

(Here's Your Sign)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBjelRDKHUk

To remain civil is one of the things that make this forum great. Unfortunately your mannerisms and etiquettes are similar to that of Roger Ver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCOjCEth6xI

[Zin-Zang]

Funny how you can't answer a simple question.

Enjoy your mindless hate mongering.

(Here's Your Sign)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBjelRDKHUk

[walemil]

It would have been nice if a case like this will go in favour of the people who filed the case in order to serve as deterrent to any one or persons who may want to use same method to cheat. There are so many scams associated with bitcoin fork, so any potential investor must be very careful.

[JollyGood]

Funny how you can't answer a simple question.

Enjoy your mindless hate mongering.

(Here's Your Sign)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBjelRDKHUk

[Rebdoomer]

There are fake versions of Bitcoin, Litecoin and Monero on the market. If this gets a lawsuit, those should as well.

[KingScorpio]

There are fake versions of Bitcoin, Litecoin and Monero on the market. If this gets a lawsuit, those should as well.

they dont call themselves fake versions, actually they are just people doing a "me too" cryptocurrency, similar like those companies that imitate kellogs and also create breakfeast fries under a different logo, there was no god telling everyone that bitcoin and sathshi nakamoto is now the worlds cryptocurrency.

bitcoin was the group that dared to make it, as everyone else was scared (illegal no license) or didnt believed doing one was worth it, even nakamoto doubted the success.

[franky1]

There are fake versions of Bitcoin, Litecoin and Monero on the market. If this gets a lawsuit, those should as well.

they dont call themselves fake versions, actually they are just people doing a "me too" cryptocurrency, similar like those companies that imitate kellogs and also create breakfeast fries under a different logo, there was no god telling everyone that bitcoin and sathshi nakamoto is now the worlds cryptocurrency.

bitcoin was the group that dared to make it, as everyone else was scared (illegal no license) or didnt believed doing one was worth it, even nakamoto doubted the success.

to clarify things

if a coin is 99% reused code, but restarts at block zero with a few alterations to average block time and total supply. these are known as shitcoins and should not contain the word "bitcoin" at all as they have no tx history belonging to the chain satoshi himself used (no satoshi to hal tx for instance)

if a coin does contain some historic data that belongs to satoshis genesis block and tx of known bitcoin users. then it could use the "bitcoin" brand
however if they forked without a "bitcoin" event its a unilateral fork. so it could also make its own name (clams for instance)

now the thing with bitcoin core and bitcoin cash specifically is that both bitcoin core and bitcoin cash had a promoted bilateral SPLIT event. yep they both split and both went in different directions to the old chain. so they should use the "bitcoin" name

but remember no dev team should own the brand. yep that includes the bitcoin core team too.

for instance. the "dollar" comparison
originating from british colonies. when countries split from british empire currency they used was "dollar".
very technically. if i was to be anal. satoshi's invention 2009-2013 "bitcoin" would have been the "pound", yea very anal
and then when core took over 2013, core became the "dollar" and thus should not have been called "bitcoin"(pound).. but something else...
.. yes there was discussion to rename it core coin. but in the end they stuck with "bitcoin" because forks and switching names was not a thing then

but thats just going real anal so lets ignore the satoshi-qt to bitcoin core switch(2009-2013)

so lets just start things from the "dollar" perspective that had british colony backstory
so lets just start things from the "bitcoin" perspective of 2013+ that had satoshi genesis and certain amount of satoshi's tx data(2009-2013)

anyway. because certain coins did derive from and includes data of the 2013+ chain so should use the "bitcoin". but just like dollar. its important to inform people if its bitcoin core or bitcoin cash.(U.S or A.U) and to stop treating just one as the one and only "bitcoin" and stop trying to say the other is fraud, fake, non existant.

this means bitcoin.org should not pretend core is the only bitcoin. nor should bitcoin.org pretend bitcoin cash does not exist

yes in local closed door common conversation can people abbreviate bitcoin core or bitcoin cash to "bitcoin" when trading with other like minded community that use the same network. but should never declare to the whole world that only one network team OWN the brand.

EG australians in australia can just say dollar. but when talking openly to the world it must be clarified that they are talking about A.U dollar
EG amerians in america can just say dollar. but when talking openly to the world it must be clarified that they are talking about U.S dollar

EG core in core specifc areas can just say bitcoin for abbreviated conversation sake. but when talking openly in open non specific forums must clarify that they are talking about bitcoin core
EG cash in cash specific areas can just say bitcoin for abbreviated conversation sake. but when talking openly in non specific forums must clarify that they are talking about bitcoin cash

other coins which just decided without any "bitcoin" event. to start running a node on a separate network is not a bilatral split.and thus have less prominance to declare they are part of the "bitcoin" family.

again this whole thing could have been avoided IF he core team and their partner bloq did not do a bilateral split. because the reality is that core is not the sole owner of "bitcoin" no matter how much people want to pretend it is. no matter how many lawsuits they want to file core should not have sole ownership of "bitcoin"

[KingScorpio]

There are fake versions of Bitcoin, Litecoin and Monero on the market. If this gets a lawsuit, those should as well.

they dont call themselves fake versions, actually they are just people doing a "me too" cryptocurrency, similar like those companies that imitate kellogs and also create breakfeast fries under a different logo, there was no god telling everyone that bitcoin and sathshi nakamoto is now the worlds cryptocurrency.

bitcoin was the group that dared to make it, as everyone else was scared (illegal no license) or didnt believed doing one was worth it, even nakamoto doubted the success.

to clarify things

if a coin is 99% reused code, but restarts at block zero with a few alterations to average block time and total supply. these are known as shitcoins and should not contain the word "bitcoin" at all as they have no tx history belonging to the chain satoshi himself used (no satoshi to hal tx for instance)

if a coin does contain some historic data that belongs to satoshis genesis block and tx of known bitcoin users. then it could use the "bitcoin" brand
however if they forked without a "bitcoin" event its a unilateral fork. so it could also make its own name (clams for instance)

now the thing with bitcoin core and bitcoin cash specifically is that both bitcoin core and bitcoin cash had a promoted bilateral SPLIT event. yep they both split and both went in different directions to the old chain. so they should use the "bitcoin" name

but remember no dev team should own the brand. yep that includes the bitcoin core team too.

for instance. the "dollar" comparison
originating from british colonies. when countries split from british empire currency they used was "dollar".
very technically. if i was to be anal. satoshi's invention 2009-2013 "bitcoin" would have been the "pound", yea very anal
and then when core took over 2013, core became the "dollar" and thus should not have been called "bitcoin"(pound).. but something else...
.. yes there was discussion to rname it core coin. but in the end they stuck with "bitcoin"

but thats just going real anal so lets ignore the satoshi-qt to bitcoin core switch

and lets just start things from the "dollar" perspective that had british colony backstory
and lets just start things from the "bitcoin" perspective of 2013+ that had satoshi genesis and certain amount of satoshi's tx data

anyway. because certain coins did derive from and includes data of the 2013+ chain so should use the "bitcoin". but just like dollar. its important to inform people if its bitcoin core or bitcoin cash.(U.S or A.U) and to stop treating just one as the one and only "bitcoin" and stop trying to say the other is fraud, fake, non existant.

this means bitcoin.org should not pretend core is the only bitcoin. nor should bitcoin.org pretend bitcoin cash does not exist

yes in local closed door common conversation can people abbreviate bitcoin core or bitcoin cash to "bitcoin" when trading with other like minded community that use the same network. but should never declare to the whole world that only one network team OWN the brand.

EG australians in australia can just say dollar. but when talking openly to the world it must be clarified that they are talking about A.U dollar
EG amerians in america can just say dollar. but when talking openly to the world it must be clarified that they are talking about U.S dollar

EG core in core specifc areas can just say bitcoin for abbreviated conversation sake. but when talking openly in open non specific forums must clarify that they are talking about bitcoin core
EG cash in cash specific areas can just say bitcoin for abbreviated conversation sake. but when talking openly in non specific forums must clarify that they are talking about bitcoin cash

other coins which just decided without any "bitcoin" event. to start running a node on a separate network is not a bilatral split.and thus have less prominance to declare they are part of the "bitcoin" family.

again this whole thing could have been avoided if he core team and their partner block did not do a bilateral split. because the reality is that core is not the owner of bitcoin no matter how much people want to pretend it is. no matter how many lawsuits they want to file core should not have sole ownership of "bitcoin"

when it comes to technology it doesnt matter what was the original bitcoin, do people today still care what the original car is? what the original phone is? what the original first sword or axe is? hell jeah they dont even care what the original paper money bill is, and all its complex technology steps. they dont even give value to it.

they simply dont,

do people use still use netscape navigator because its the original first browser?

no they dont,

it wont matter in the end, that bitcoin is the original first cryptocurrency that dared to challenge the banking cartels.

for me and many others bitcoin is freedom from overregulated and abusive broken banking system, but thats it. bitcoin cant deliver more than that its not designed for more.

the japanese that in masses accept bitcoin should have the best understanding why they shouldn't. ressource efficiency is important for peace and security in east asia, bitcoin was a good start, but it cant be the longterm future.

there is a huge problem comming in the future if there will be more and more cryptocurrencies:
a vast part of the population will think: why am i money earning cattle while others just make it out of nothing.....

[Grayy]

It is such a shame that he had to deceive unsuspecting newbies into buying the wrong bitcoin. People like him make genuine newbie investors "scared" to join the cryptocurrency market. This should sound a stern warn to every investor of bitcoin to be extra careful in choosing where to buy bitcoin. It is easier to find authentic marketplace/exchanges for bitcoin. Sometimes greed makes people overlook glaring flaws. Learn the right way, however tedious it may be.

[JollyGood]

When you go to HSBC.com to open an account and order a Visa card you do not expect to find out later that you actually opened an account with Morgan Stanley and will receive a Mastercard instead

When you go to bookmylondonholiday.com for family holiday at the Hilton in London you do not expect to find out later that you actually booked a holiday living in a tent in the desert in war-torn South Sudan

When people go to bitcoin.com they expect to learn about Bitcoin and download a Bitcoin wallet

When people go to bitcoincash.org they expect to learn about Bitcoin Cash and download a Bitcoin Cash wallet

Right now: When people go to bitcoin.com they are learning about Bitcoin Cash and downloading Bitcoin Cash wallets. Not enough clarity is given to differentiate between the two. It is confusing for newbies and others.

The lawsuit was supposed to be about Ver using the bitcoin.com to create confusion and forcing him to stop it and along the way maybe some people that lost money might have got compensated

This is Roger Ver, the person that united with a couple of whales and created the fork resulting in Bitcoin Cash because they could not wrestle control of Bitcoin. Need I say more?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCOjCEth6xI

[talkbitcoin]

There are fake versions of Bitcoin, Litecoin and Monero on the market. If this gets a lawsuit, those should as well.

this whole thing about a "lawsuit" is silly to begin with but what you say is even sillier because you are ignoring the big difference here! you would have been correct if Charlie Lee started calling LTC as bitcoin but he is not and he never had. but Roger Ver is continuing to call BCH as bitcoin.

[s100]

 yes with how he handled things, that really warrants a class action lawsuit, though I doubt they would really get into it. What he did from a consumer's perspective is fraudulent and you can't defend that no matter how you put it in the court. Nobody owns bitcoin nor bitcoin cash, sure, but misleading people to buy your 'product' (technically, Roger Ver is the face of bitcoin cash and he advertises the hell out of it) while they wanted to buy another product is fraud. I hope that they really are enthusiastic in getting this thing off so as to put Ver behind bars. A once smart man lowered to the ranks of a scum.

[JollyGood]

yes with how he handled things, that really warrants a class action lawsuit, though I doubt they would really get into it. What he did from a consumer's perspective is fraudulent and you can't defend that no matter how you put it in the court. Nobody owns bitcoin nor bitcoin cash, sure, but misleading people to buy your 'product' (technically, Roger Ver is the face of bitcoin cash and he advertises the hell out of it) while they wanted to buy another product is fraud. I hope that they really are enthusiastic in getting this thing off so as to put Ver behind bars. A once smart man lowered to the ranks of a scum.

He most certainly seemed once upon a time a smart man who had ethics and morals. According to some websites he gave up his US citizenship and moved to St. Kitts & Nevis maybe before he became a Bitcoin millionaire. All this supposedly because he did not agree with various principles of the rule of law in his USA.

How he morphed in to what many people see as anti-bitcoin and bitcoin-hating is a question beyond the fact he could not and never will wrestle control of bitcoin.org and Satoshi's vision of bitcoin. Ver trying to sell Bitcoin Cash as "the real bitcoin as Satoshi has visualised" is about as true as the "Hey Diddle Diddle" nursery rhyme where the cow jumped over moon.

[Juggy777]

I'm bit disappointed that he's getting away by misleading people, so many of them have now a coin that is not what they wanted. He's caused ill reputation to the entire crypto world and yet he gets away with it. I'm bit surprised that none of the people who were sold or coarse to buy btc cash instead of btc are not filling a case. Maybe fill they'll be prosecuted or for what ever reason this is a sad news. Read more details from the link : https://coinpedia.org/news/pro-bitcoin-cancels-lawsuit-bitcoindotcom/

[franky1]

Right now: When people go to bitcoin.ORG they are learning about Bitcoin CORE and downloading Bitcoin CORE wallets. Not enough clarity is given to differentiate between the two. It is confusing for newbies and others.

dont you see the hypocrisy..
dot org is about core and dot com is about cash

again take a step back from defending and implying core own "bitcoin" and you might see the hypocrisy

[Aura]

I feel that these kind of lawsuits will never get off the ground, or are doomed for failure if they ever get started. When nobody owns the Bitcoin trademark and there are thousands of forks getting generated which use the Bitcoin brand, it would be tough to point fingers at Roger Ver and Bitcoin Cash.

I feel feel the same way, it could potentially make the situation even worse if the case gets more media attention. Negative attention is still attention, we have seen this many times before.