...to bitcoins as commodities.
Bitcoins are commodities. ...A thing is tangible if it is “[c]apable of being possessed or realized; readily apprehensible by the mind; real; substantial; evident.” Ballentine’s Law Dictionary; See Williams v Board of Comrs. 84 Kan 508, 114 P 858. Bitcoins are clearly useful articles of commerce capable of being possessed.
This is pure conjecture. While some amount of speculation on potential juridical outcomes can be constructive, making such statements in conclusory terms like you have can only lead to confusion on this issue. As I am sure you are aware, there is no case, nor any pending litigation which purports to give an opinion on the issues you raise here. I suggest you rework some of your phrasing to reflect this reality.
Thank you for your comment and concern.
Conclusions are a part of legal writing. Conclusory means offering a conclusion without supporting evidence. As you will see, even from just from the paragraph you quoted, my conclusions are supported by legal arguments, and properly cite legally authoritative sources.
I think people are comfortable with the idea that bitcoins are used in commerce, however, I am surprised that people do not inherently realize that bitcoins are capable of being possessed. I will supplement that paragraph shortly with further citation to U.S. code and cases where digital articles, e.g., electronic chattel paper, U.S. dollars distributed electronically, contracts, illicit pictures on a hard drive.
