From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A146C001E for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:35:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32BA1401FB for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:35:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PYSiQJUtRykU for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:35:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76379400A8 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lf1-f41.google.com (mail-lf1-f41.google.com [209.85.167.41]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as jlrubin@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 20EIYvls016283 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 13:34:58 -0500 Received: by mail-lf1-f41.google.com with SMTP id x11so7272776lfa.2 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:34:58 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531xyeK5W07WEkwiWRsy7DAeEW1LdakAwMYKOluhWtaVht3TiyEc FLxvZdzySgdUJo1TfEna0VFFMKz01zFGl8qnPdA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzd0XgAYOcEv5kMNycgT9gNLqxkgl4/0dToBPq239z+OAjbFAdzY352cEklS7u5j+TVYDKID77Lyoj8Y2WDdE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8e81:: with SMTP id z1mr7173082ljk.57.1642185296905; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:34:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Jeremy Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 10:34:45 -0800 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: To: qmccormick13 , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000047091405d58f0f47" Cc: Prayank , info@bitcoindefensefund.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 18:35:02 -0000 --00000000000047091405d58f0f47 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If I understand the intent of your message correctly, that's unfortunately not how the law works. If there is a case that is precedent setting, whether it directly involves bitcoin or not, a bitcoin focused legal fund might want to either offer representation or file an amicus brief to guide the court to making a decision beneficial to Bitcoin Developers. More than likely, some of these cases would involve developers of alternative projects (as they might be "ahead of the curve" on legal problems) and heading off a strong precedent for other communities would be protective for Bitcoiners in general. As an example, were the developers building Rollups on Ethereum to face a legal threat, since we might one day want similar software for Bitcoin, ensuring a good outcome for them helps Bitcoin. That said, all organizations must at some point have a defined scope, and it seems the BLDF is primarily focused for now on things impacting the developers of Bitcoin or software for bitcoin specifically. I "trust" the legal team behind BLDF will form a coherent strategy around what is relevant to Bitcoin defense, even if the particulars of a case are not directly about Bitcoin. cheers, Jeremy -- @JeremyRubin On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:25 AM qmccormick13 via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > I very much hope the fund will not finance lawsuits irrelevant to bitcoin= . > > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:23 PM Aymeric Vitte via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> (P2P?) Electronic Cash (Defense?) Fund or Electronic Cash Foundation ? >> More neutral, potentially covering others than Bitcoin, mimicking a bit >> EFF (even if as stated US is not the only target), referring to >> Satoshi's paper where everything started >> >> Maybe I am not up to date but it would be good to know what are the >> current procedures with the Tulip thing >> >> Aymeric >> >> >> Le 13/01/2022 =C3=A0 19:20, jack via bitcoin-dev a =C3=A9crit : >> > Hi Prayank, >> > >> >> On 13 Jan 2022, at 10:13, Prayank wrote: >> >> I had few suggestions and feel free to ignore them if they do not mak= e >> sense: >> >> >> >> 1.Name of this fund could be anything and 'The Bitcoin Legal Defense >> Fund' can be confusing or misleading for newbies. There is nothing offic= ial >> in Bitcoin however people believe things written in news articles and so= me >> of them might consider it as an official bitcoin legal fund. >> > Excellent point. Will come up with a better name. >> > >> >> 2.It would be better if people involved in such important funds do no= t >> comment/influence soft fork related discussions. Example: Alex Morcos ha= d >> some opinions about activation mechanism during Taproot soft fork IIRC. >> > Yes. Will think through this and board operating principles we can >> share publicly, which would probably include criteria for how cases are >> chosen, to protect against this board and fund influencing direction. >> > >> > Open to ideas and suggestions on all. >> > >> > jack >> > _______________________________________________ >> > bitcoin-dev mailing list >> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >> > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --00000000000047091405d58f0f47 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
If I understand the inten= t of your message correctly, that's unfortunately not how the law works= .

If there is a case that is=C2=A0precedent=C2=A0setting, whether it = directly involves bitcoin or not, a bitcoin focused legal fund might want t= o either offer representation or file an amicus brief to guide the court to= making a decision beneficial to Bitcoin Developers.

More than likely= , some of these cases would involve developers of alternative projects (as = they might be "ahead of the curve" on legal problems) and heading= off a strong precedent for other communities would be protective for Bitco= iners in general. As an example, were the developers building=C2=A0Rollups = on Ethereum to face a legal threat, since we might one day want similar sof= tware for Bitcoin, ensuring a good outcome for them helps Bitcoin.

T= hat said, all organizations must at some point have a defined scope, and it= seems the BLDF is primarily focused for now on things impacting the develo= pers of Bitcoin or software for bitcoin specifically. I "trust" t= he legal team behind BLDF will form a coherent strategy around what is rele= vant to Bitcoin defense, even if the particulars of a case are not directly= about Bitcoin.

cheers,

Jeremy
-= -
@JeremyR= ubin<= /div>


On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:25 AM qmccormick13 via bitc= oin-dev <bitcoi= n-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
=
I very much hope the fund will not finance lawsuits irrele= vant to bitcoin.

On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:23 PM Aymeric Vitte via bitc= oin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);pa= dding-left:1ex">(P2P?) Electronic Cash (Defense?) Fund or Electronic Cash F= oundation ?
More neutral, potentially covering others than Bitcoin, mimicking a bit
EFF (even if as stated US is not the only target), referring to
Satoshi's paper where everything started

Maybe I am not up to date but it would be good to know what are the
current procedures with the Tulip thing

Aymeric


Le 13/01/2022 =C3=A0 19:20, jack via bitcoin-dev a =C3=A9crit :
> Hi Prayank,
>
>> On 13 Jan 2022, at 10:13, Prayank <prayank@tutanota.de> wrote:
>> I had few suggestions and feel free to ignore them if they do not = make sense:
>>
>> 1.Name of this fund could be anything and 'The Bitcoin Legal D= efense Fund' can be confusing or misleading for newbies. There is nothi= ng official in Bitcoin however people believe things written in news articl= es and some of them might consider it as an official bitcoin legal fund. > Excellent point. Will come up with a better name.
>
>> 2.It would be better if people involved in such important funds do= not comment/influence soft fork related discussions. Example: Alex Morcos = had some opinions about activation mechanism during Taproot soft fork IIRC.=
> Yes. Will think through this and board operating principles we can sha= re publicly, which would probably include criteria for how cases are chosen= , to protect against this board and fund influencing direction.
>
> Open to ideas and suggestions on all.
>
> jack
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org= /mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--00000000000047091405d58f0f47--