Hey guys!
I am a 4th-year law student in the UK and want to write a dissertation on legal nature of cryptocurrency. There are 3 predominant ideas regarding the topic. Firstly, some lawyers see it as money. The second view is that it is an obligation. And the last one, and the position mainly taken in the US, is that it is a commodity (like diamonds or oil).
I don't know anything about cryptocurrencies, and maybe someone could help with starting the research or maybe with some expert opinion on the issue?
Thank u very much in advance for any help!
in short:
you have interest groups that push their version of it
the banks want money earning cattle, and those under their umbrella, support the banks
then there are those that are disadvantaged by the banks as the banks run a pyramid system, so they naturally exist.
from that comes the idea to say cryptocurrencies are obligations or not money,
but to be honest, the us dollar is also an obligation then, but why a commoditiy? this doesnt make sense at all a commodity should be something in the productive industry somewhint out of matterm but also there definitions vary.
so to give you a really good understanding whats going on in the market and debate:
there are interest groups defending their power, and groups seeking to grow power,
all discusion and legitimisation discussions are some kind of results of that conflict between those interest groups that partitially also hide themselves or use others to speak for them.
i end this with an
article from my blog that nearly shows some of the character between the definitions and how they are interest driven.
in some really nasty part of the conflicts its all about the position to define and hold the power of the money earning cattle.
