From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YDctU-0004Rm-3j for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:47:12 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.39]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YDctT-0003sf-8W for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:47:12 +0000 Received: from resomta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.102]) by resqmta-ch2-07v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id iHms1p0062D5gil01Hn6Kd; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:47:06 +0000 Received: from crushinator.localnet ([IPv6:2601:6:4800:47f:1e4e:1f4d:332c:3bf6]) by resomta-ch2-06v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id iHn41p00j2JF60R01Hn5Zh; Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:47:05 +0000 From: Matt Whitlock To: Tamas Blummer Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:47:04 -0500 Message-ID: <30930479.sqHpaOe3cY@crushinator> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (Linux/3.16.5-gentoo; KDE/4.14.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <656E7756-5F0B-4594-B9F1-8CC68C7A5EE5@bitsofproof.com> References: <20150120154641.GA32556@muck> <2236907.ZtrNgikFVR@crushinator> <656E7756-5F0B-4594-B9F1-8CC68C7A5EE5@bitsofproof.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [69.252.207.39 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1YDctT-0003sf-8W Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] The legal risks of auto-updating wallet software; custodial relationships X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 17:47:12 -0000 On Tuesday, 20 January 2015, at 6:44 pm, Tamas Blummer wrote: > Knowing the private key and owning the linked coins is not necessaril= y the same in front of a court. >=20 > At least in german law there is a difference between =E2=80=98Eigentu= m' means ownership and =E2=80=98Besitz=E2=80=99 means ability to deal w= ith it. > Being able to deal with an asset does not make you the owner. So what we're telling the newbies in /r/bitcoin is plain wrong. Bitcoin= s *do* have an owner independent from the parties who have access to th= e private keys that control their disposition. That's pretty difficult = to reconcile from a technological perspective.