Meaning of the Bitcoin protocol: A look at the differences between Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies

Veröffentlicht:

Von:

Bitcoin: Das digitale Bargeld mit Rückverfolgbarkeit Das Bitcoin-Protokoll wurde entwickelt, um ein stabiles und sicheres System zu gewährleisten. Im Gegensatz zur landläufigen Meinung handelt es sich bei Bitcoin jedoch nicht um eine anonyme Kryptowährung. Während Kryptowährungen generell als anonym und nicht nachvollziehbar angesehen werden, ist Bitcoin pseudonym und rückverfolgbar. Dennoch sollten wir nicht alles glauben, was auf den ersten Blick erscheint, wie der britische Bericht über Treuhandpflichten deutlich aufzeigt. Laut dem Bericht gehören zu den gesetzlich anerkannten Kategorien von Treuhändern „Vertreter, Treuhänder, Partner, Unternehmensleiter und Anwälte“. Es wird betont, dass Treuhandpflichten außerhalb dieser Kategorien selten existieren. Die Beklagten in dem …
Bitcoin: The digital cash with traceability The Bitcoin protocol was developed to ensure a stable and safe system. In contrast to the popular opinion, Bitcoin is not an anonymous cryptocurrency. While cryptocurrencies are generally considered anonymous and not understandable, Bitcoin is pseudonymous and traceable. Nevertheless, we should not believe everything that appears at first glance, as the British report on trust obligations clearly shows. According to the report, the legally recognized categories of trustees are "representatives, trustees, partners, company managers and lawyers". It is emphasized that trust obligations are rarely available outside of these categories. The defendant in the ... (Symbolbild/KNAT)

Bitcoin: The digital cash with traceability

The Bitcoin protocol was developed to ensure a stable and safe system. In contrast to the popular opinion, Bitcoin is not an anonymous cryptocurrency. While cryptocurrencies are generally considered anonymous and not understandable, Bitcoin is pseudonymous and traceable.

Nevertheless, we should not believe everything that appears at first glance, as the British report on trust obligations clearly shows. According to the report, the legally recognized categories of trustees are "representatives, trustees, partners, company managers and lawyers". It is emphasized that trust obligations are rarely available outside of these categories. In this case, the defendants do not meet any of these criteria, such as the legal representative of the developer, the Bitcoin Law Defense Foundation (BLDF).

In a recent blog post, the BLDF said that the defendants were neither agents, trustees, partners, corporate managers nor lawyers, and they were never obliged to manage property or make decisions on behalf of other people. The core idea of ​​Bitcoin is to facilitate transactions between individuals without having to transfer the authority to a third party.

The obligation to faith, as defined by the University of Texas, is the legal responsibility to act exclusively in the best interest of another party. Unpleasant loyalty, duty of care, complete disclosure of conflicts of interest and confidentiality are the most common examples of trust obligations.

The current Tulip Trading lawsuit asks the question of liability of open source developers for assets. The process is expected to take place in 2024 and could be groundbreaking. Jessica Jonas, Chief Legal Officer of the BLDF, pointed out during the Bitcoin 2023 conference that the effects of the lawsuit could be extensive, since 97 % of all software programs are open source programs worldwide.

The report of the British Law Commission also emphasizes the need for a new category of personal property in order to meet the unique characteristics of digital assets.

Overall, this information illustrates that Bitcoin acts as a digital cash that can be traceable, but not anonymous. It remains to be seen how the legal situation for open source developers and digital assets will develop.