Forgot your password?
Bitcoin The Courts

US Court Freezes Assets of Mt. Gox CEO 132

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the should-have-stuck-to-magic-cards dept.
jfruh writes "Mt. Gox has managed to enter court-protected bankruptcy in the United States, but Gregory Greene, who lost $25,000 in the bitcoin company's collapse, has convinced a court in Chicago to freeze the assets of Mt. Gox CEO Mark Karpeles and two companies associated with him. 'Money is moving around as we speak, bitcoins are moving around accounts associated with Mt. Gox,' said Greene's lawyer. 'Something is not right so we urgently need to get to the bottom of this quickly.'" The Mt Gox stole the missing bitcoins theory.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Court Freezes Assets of Mt. Gox CEO

Comments Filter:
  • by ron_ivi (607351) <sdotno AT cheapcomplexdevices DOT com> on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:02PM (#46465469)

    In Japan, MtGox is not liable because bitcoins aren't money (i.e. nothing real was lost).

    Couldn't one say the same about most any fiat currency (backed by nothing but the whims of some private company (the Federal Reserve Bank) - not unlike how WoW gold is backed by nothing but the whims of Bilzzard)? And also the same about any currency with lenders that get to do fractional reserve banking (they essentially get to make money on whims by loaning out more than they have)?

    Seems Bitcoins aren't that different than Zimbabwe Dollars.

  • by Sockatume (732728) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:10PM (#46465535)

    Err, pretty much the only thing the Bitcoin network does is "prove where [bitcoins] went". Outside the network is another matter. The issue isn't unregulated Bitcoin; the issue is unregulated Bitcoin exchanges.

  • by JDG1980 (2438906) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:10PM (#46465543)

    In Japan, MtGox is not liable because bitcoins aren't money (i.e. nothing real was lost).

    Whether or not bitcoins are "money" should be irrelevant. What matters is that they are a thing of value. How do we know they are a thing of value? Because someone is willing to pay for them. Therefore they are an asset, just as (say) a collection of classic cars or rare Atari 2600 games would be an asset. None of them are official currency, but they are things of value, and that value can be defined with a reasonable amount of precision by looking at what people are paying for these items on various markets.

  • by lgw (121541) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:16PM (#46465585) Journal

    It's funny when the financial press mistakes MtGOX (Magic the Gathering Online Exchange, lest we forget) for "Mt. Gox", like it was a mountain or something.

    It's pathetic when TFS makes the same mistake. C'mon, there are two bitcoin stories a day, we could at least get that right in TFS!

  • by JDG1980 (2438906) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:16PM (#46465593)

    Wake up. Karpeles is a con artist and a sociopath. He'll say anything to string along the suckers for a bit longer. Not a word coming out of his mouth (or from his Twitter feed or whatever) can be believed.

    The U.S. government loves to trumpet its drug/laundering asset seizures. Look at Silk Road. This thing was not done in a corner. Nor was the house arrest of Charlie Shrem for alleged Bitcoin-related money laundering covered up in any way.

    The only way the government would demand everything stay on the q.t. would be if there was still an ongoing investigation. But if that was the case, then the messy public shutdown of Mt. Gox would have already ruined that. If the government was surveilling Mt. Gox customers and wanted Karpeles to keep his mouth shut, they would have told him to carry on business as usual so no one would be alerted, and Mt. Gox would still be running.

  • by JDG1980 (2438906) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:22PM (#46465643)

    So, assuming that he has substantial holdings in bitcoin, then what good does the asset freeze do? He is free to spend bitcoin, unless the asset freeze also prevents businesses from accepting money of any kind from him.

    If he violates the court order, it would be treated the same way as if he violated any other court order: he could be held in contempt and sent to jail.

  • by arth1 (260657) on Wednesday March 12, 2014 @01:53PM (#46466129) Homepage Journal

    Slashdot is supposed to be the place where we discuss the tech and ignore the marketing spin. While we maybe don't reach that bar often enough, we can at least make the effort, no? Especially in story submissions.

    Don't you mean " Chips & Dips is supposed to be..."?

Whenever a system becomes completely defined, some damn fool discovers something which either abolishes the system or expands it beyond recognition.