Ulbricht Admits Seized Bitcoins Are His and Wants Them Back 243
An anonymous reader writes with the latest news about the aftermath of the Silk Road shutdown "From the article: 'Ulbricht ... said in a notarised December 11 statement that he believes the virtual currency should be returned to him because Bitcoins are "not subject to seizure" by federal law. Ulbricht, 29, now admits the Bitcoin fortune is his — even though he's previously denied any wrongdoing regarding Silk Road and claimed through his lawyer that the feds arrested the wrong guy.' So not only has he now confirmed his link to the site, and confirmed the money is his, but also means that a few precedents will be set. Is it seizable? Is it just 'copying data?'"
Relatedly, three alleged moderators of Silk Road were indicted on Friday.
Re:The master owns everything, including your *LIF (Score:2, Informative)
Big assumption: BitCoin is a currency. If it is then it is confiscated as proceeds of illegal acts. If it isn't then it is an asset, just like converting dollars into works of art, shares, et alia and is *not* confiscated except as means of paying fines. They can't have it both ways.
That BitCoin is "presented" as a currency is immaterial (pun intended) as it can also be "presented" as barter.
Re:The master owns everything, including your *LIF (Score:5, Informative)
Except that ill-gotten gains are always subject to seizure. Look up US Federal drug forfeiture laws some time. The feds can take anything that's the proceed of or used to facilitate drug crimes. It doesn't matter what form the assets are in. If the feds can prove they were bought with drug money, they can seize them. If they were used as an active part of the trade, the feds can seize them. Since the bitcoins appear to be both, it's going to be pretty easy for the feds to get them.
Re:settled by child porn etc cases, he can examine (Score:2, Informative)
That's why the FBI have moved the bitcoin already from addresses under DPRs control to addresses under theirs.