Nostr Web Client

The risk you allude to always existed (and probably will always exist) because 1) it was always possible to mine a block with illegal content in an OP_RETURN, and 2) illegal content can always be embedded in the blockchain using various other methods (even if your BIP is adopted).

Fortunately, there appears to be pretty broad consensus among experts in law that this is not a real risk, anyways: https://protos.com/exclusive-lawyers-call-bitcoin-core-v30-csam-concerns-overblown/

DireMunchkin 2mo ago 💬 1

Thank you for actually engaging with this question.

I read that article back when it came out and I'm not convinced just reaching out informally to a few lawyers is enough due diligence. At least not when the risk is this high.

Even then 1/7 of them actually was concerned about it. If we roll with that as the only evidence that was gathered we have a 1/7 chance Bitcoin will be deemed illegal in the future.

I'd be more reassured if we had any lawyers actually seriously look into the risks involved. Or had some statements from government bodies that'd be involved that we're in the clear. (FCC in the US? Equivalent EU bodies?)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Aaron van Wirdum 2mo ago 💬 1

That one lawyer did not even want to stake his name and reputation to defend his claim.

As such we also have no way to determine how credible this person is to begin with.

Judging by all other responses, not credible at all.

DireMunchkin 2mo ago

Whatever. I'm not going to get into pedantics about this blog post. Just the fact that this is all we have to go on is the bigger problem.