Tokyo Court Rejects Gox Lawsuit, Says Bitcoins Not “Tangible Property”

A Tokyo District court has dismissed a lawsuit by a former MtGox customer seeking repayment of his bitcoins, arguing that they are not “subject to ownership” claims.

The ruling comes at a time of revisitation of the MtGox saga and the missing 850,000 bitcoins. On Saturday, Tokyo police arrested former CEO Mark Karpeles on suspicion that he had falsified account balances and funneled customer funds for personal use to his other businesses. The investigation may eventually shed light on how the 850,000 coins disappeared.

A resident of Kyoto claimed to have 458 bitcoins, worth ¥31 million, on the exchange at the time of its collapse, according to The Japan Times. While most former customers have relied on the ongoing liquidation proceedings to recover a portion of their funds, the resident sought to recover his full balance through a lawsuit. Several other customers have reportedly tried to do the same.

Presiding Judge Masumi Kurachi ruled, however, that the Civil Code for property rights applies only to tangible assets that occupy space and allow for exclusive control over them. Bitcoin Bitcoin While some may still be wondering what is Bitcoin, who created Bitcoin, or how does Bitcoin work, one thing is certain: Bitcoin has changed the world.No one can remain indifferent to this revolutionary, decentralized, digital asset nor to its blockchain technology.In fact, we’ve gone a long way ever since a Florida resident Laszlo Hanyecz made BTC’s first official commercial transaction with a real company by trading 10,000 Bitcoins for 2 pizzas at his local Papa John’s.One could now argue that While some may still be wondering what is Bitcoin, who created Bitcoin, or how does Bitcoin work, one thing is certain: Bitcoin has changed the world.No one can remain indifferent to this revolutionary, decentralized, digital asset nor to its blockchain technology.In fact, we’ve gone a long way ever since a Florida resident Laszlo Hanyecz made BTC’s first official commercial transaction with a real company by trading 10,000 Bitcoins for 2 pizzas at his local Papa John’s.One could now argue that Read this Term does not qualify, he argued, because transactions between users require the involvement of a third party.

Perhaps a more intuitive argument would be the fact that by their very definition, bitcoins do not carry legal ‘ownership’. Whoever has access to them, i.e. their private keys, controls them and can spend them.

The notion of partial control, such as multisignature configurations where multiple keys are stored with several parties, has been a subject of debate when discussing Regulation Regulation Like any other industry with a high net worth, the financial services industry is tightly regulated to help curb illicit behavior and manipulation. Each asset class has its own set of protocols put in place to combat their respective forms of abuse.In the foreign exchange space, regulation is assumed by authorities in multiple jurisdictions, though ultimately lacking a binding international order. Who are the Industry’s Leading Regulators?Regulators such as the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority ( Like any other industry with a high net worth, the financial services industry is tightly regulated to help curb illicit behavior and manipulation. Each asset class has its own set of protocols put in place to combat their respective forms of abuse.In the foreign exchange space, regulation is assumed by authorities in multiple jurisdictions, though ultimately lacking a binding international order. Who are the Industry’s Leading Regulators?Regulators such as the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority ( Read this Term. The question has been posed whether a business partially controlling the private keys to client funds is subject to licensing requirements.