Christopher Hopkins Speaks At Miami Bitcoin – Regulatory Panel (TNABC)

Virtual Currency

The North American Bitcoin Conference was held in Miami Beach this weekend and included a discussion of regulatory issues among attorneys Jacob Farber, Kathryn Haun, Christopher Hopkins, Andrew Ittleman, and Marco Santori as well as non-lawyers Perianne Boring and Australian Senator Sam Dastyari.IMG_9229

One topic that was stressed was that government regulation is slow while private lawsuits are coming much faster.  Those suits can help clean up the industry by targeting fraudulent practices and sending a warning signal that the virtual currency market is not a free-for-all open to dishonest practices.

The Inside Bitcoins article, #BTCMiami: Regulation Panel Predicts New State Law Imminent — and “Look Out for Lawsuits” is here.

Coindesk has coverage of both days of the conference here and here.

Videos of the sessions are forthcoming and will be linked (here) when available.

Palm Beach
Palm Beach Bitcoin Case Heats Up With Plaintiff Deposition, Discovery Memo, and Hearing this Week (Est. of David Kleiman v. Craig Wright)

We have been following the bitcoin lawsuit pending down the street at the federal courthouse in West Palm Beach between the Estate of David Kleiman and W&K Defense Research, LLC, on the one hand, and Craig Wright, on the other. Bitcoin enthusiasts believe that Kleiman and/or Wright may either be …

A Lot of Lawyers Claim That They Accept Bitcoin… But Are They Doing It Wrong?

A lawyers’ ethics committee appointed by the Nebraska Supreme Court issued an opinion regarding whether lawyers in that state could receive payments in bitcoin; receive payments from third parties in bitcoin; and/or hold bitcoin for their clients.  This applies to any digital currency.  The committee was clearly well-informed and wrote …

Virtual Currency
Federal Court Allows Bitcoin Investor Suit to Proceed

A federal court judge in New Jersey entered an order today allowing a civil suit involving Bitcoin investments to proceed.  The Court ruled that it had jurisdiction over the case based upon the pleadings regarding diversity of the parties and the value of the case exceeding $70,000.   In fact, …