Quote from: BadGhost on July 11, 2016, 10:53:08 AM

Hello everyone,

I have some issues regarding the Bitcoin. Nakamoto wrote the bitcoin code and started the network. He published the work under the MIT license, which says something that obtaining the copy of this software is okay and whatever. What I want to know is, whether we can still consider bitcoin to be the original, yet many times updated, computer program of Nakamoto or whether the network we all use is the licensed copy.

In another words: Is bitcoin,in sense of the string of hashed text - the thing you can transfer - spent, part of the Nakamoto's creation, as it stays in the freaking blockchain, or did we all download the licensed program and subsequently the spendable bitcoins are licensed as well.

There is a difference between the Bitcoin and for example an mp3. file bitcoin always stays unique and does not need to be licensed I wonder from the point of view of someone who is an IT expert or at least someone who does IT what do we use. The licensed part or no?

GOD damn it putting this together took way too long. If none understands what am I asking please say so so I can rephrase. thank you.

The question is in the wrong path. I mean how can bitcoin have a copywright when it is independent of the government. It is a cryptocurrency that is uncontrolled by any policy made by the government like the banking institutions. A music record is under the rule of law it pays taxes and must be registered with the specific agency to get a patent. While bitcoins does not need any legitimacy, you can own bitcoin without getting a license from the government. You are not entitled to pay tax when you own a bitcoin. But maybe in the future your question will be relevant since government in the future will have a hold on bitcoin.