Will Decentralized Legal Representation Become A Thing For Core Developers? \ stacker news ~bitcoin

Will Decentralized Legal Representation Become A Thing For Core Developers?

5338 sats \ 18 comments \ @siggy47 22 Apr bitcoin

It seems that the Craig Wright chapter in the history of bitcoin is coming to a close. I suspect that his shenanigans would have been nipped in the bud more quickly if he had begun these lawsuits after BlackRock, Fidelity and the rest had already issued their spot btc ETF’s. The big guns on Wall Street would have hired their powerful law firms to crush his efforts. They would not have had the patience to play around with one guy who jeopardized their massive investments.

Is that a good thing? Well, I guess so. The bitcoin core developers who generously give their time to the project would not have been threatened with financial ruin. Maybe bitcoin would still have some talented people around who are now gone.

It does raise questions, though, about the independence of bitcoin core developers. Who wouldn’t want to hire the best lawyers money can buy if their wealth is threatened? Of course, they would then be beholden to their benefactors. I do worry that this may become an issue in the future.

I know Jack Dorsey’s Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund was created to protect core developers, but it may be no match for BlackRock’s big boys in the future. Do we want core developer legal fees paid for by ETF institutions? It would be a serious conflict of interest. I think this is something to think about.

view all related items

147 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 23 Apr

I wonder when people will pay attention to my words and warnings (also to @Lux daily pills)

Stop being a citizen, puting yourself under their authority. Be a sovereign individual that knows how to deal with these scams.

The simple question that put all these busllhit accusations away, respecting the Natural law:

145 sats \ 2 replies \ @wopwopwopwop 22 Apr

Why are core devs practicing bad opsec? You don't have to attach your personal identity to being a core dev. If devs are doing this without consideration to the consequences of the infamy that can come with it, they probably should not be a core dev in the first place.

This shit is no joke. Do you guys honestly think a legal defense fund will prevent core devs from being disappeared?

81 sats \ 0 replies \ @elvismercury 22 Apr

Or pressured with Offers They Can't Refuse. It's a real issue.

I doubt many of them were imagining this scenario in detail when they got started, just like most bitcoiners didn't.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

You summed it up perfectly. I'm a lawyer, but this is a real world problem that I don't see any courtroom providing protection from.

189 sats \ 4 replies \ @elvismercury 22 Apr

Agreed, this is one of those things where our social institutions, and the norms of the community, have not caught up to the realities of the world. We are, collectively, hugely fortunate that these legal issues were decided, and precedent set, by encounters with an obvious fraud with severe mental pathology. Imagine if, instead, it had been a sophisticated state-level actor, bringing a non-absurd case.

Since you have a legal background, you'd know better than almost all of us how this could play out, and what the dangers are, and the opportunities. What do you think, if you project forward?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

I went off on a tangent regarding attacks from ETFs, but I can also see BlackRock as the white knight swooping in if another CSW emerges.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

I don't think I have any special insight since I am a lawyer, but my imagination started to run a bit since I'm taking my CLE classes now, and put my law hat back on temporarily. I assume many in bitcoin have thought these things through already. Some examples: what if the block size wars were going on now? What if BlackRock throws it's weight behind a controversial BIP? I know it didn't happen in 2017, but one of these disputes could wind up in a courtroom.

I know bitcoin is decentralized, with no CEO, as we all love to say, but core developers are individual targets, and now these ETFs are potential plaintiffs.

243 sats \ 1 reply \ @elvismercury 22 Apr

The visibility of Core devs to the world seems like a massive massive security hole, for them, and for btc in general; hosting the project on Github seems the same.

Obviously the project could be hosted someplace else, but think how much time required to coordinate it all, in a leaderless, decentralized group. Things that in an actual company would be no big deal become giant challenges; and in the intervening chaos, who knows what could happen?

54 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

Exactly right. It would be an incredibly difficult undertaking, but it might be necessary.

54 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 22 Apr

Whatever became of the idea that took the IP and I want to say made it free for anyone to edit under come sort of basic license? From what I remember reading about that it would have protected developers really well but I think it was Craig Wright who was opposed to it. With his saga ending do we know if this will become a thing now?

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

Good question. I would like to know more about this.

81 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 22 Apr

I will have to see if I can find the original article and see what the exact idea was and see if it has been worked on!

37 sats \ 0 replies \ @freetx 22 Apr

I know its a thing where wealthy individuals will "invest" in lawsuits (that is agree to fund a lawsuit in exchange for a piece of the judgement).

We, as a community, should do that against CSW / Calvin.

That is, Calvin has lots of assets and he willingly perpetrated fraud that has resulted in billions in direct / indirect damages. Such a judgement could not only be lucrative, but could be used to build a warchest for Bitcoin Legal Defense Fund, etc.

27 sats \ 3 replies \ @Satosora 22 Apr

What was Craig Wright actually fighting for?

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @siggy47 OP 22 Apr

You can do a search, but all the claims stemmed from his assertion that he was Satoshi Nakamoto.