Quote from: Forester618 on April 25, 2017, 12:07:05 PM

A Federal judge in new York has recommended to cancel the charges of money laundering on local business based on the definition that Bitcoin does not fall under the definition of money. Instead, the judge Hugh B. Scott ruled that Bitcoin is more like a commodity. While he noted that Bitcoin might one day become so reasonable that it can be considered as money, Scott suggested that he currently has more in common with collectibles such as trading cards and other novelty items.
The case involved a 31-year-old man who allegedly sold Bitcoins for $13 000 to the agent in an attempt to launder money and distribute drugs. However, the interpretation of Scott was adopted by the district judge of the United States Charles Siragusa, who expressed skepticism about the possible consequences.
This is a controversial issue, so lawyers for the defendants said that they will try to withdraw the petition. In this situation, the protection refers to the scepticism of Siragusa as a defining factor in their current strategy. Lawyers of the defendant also stressed that their client is in no way connected with the so-called darknet market and just traded Bitcoins, like other trading "baseball cards, stamps or coins."

Well, that was some luck their for the defendant.

IF i was the judge and i just bothered to read over what the hell is bitcoin about for 1 minute before I made the decision, i would have stayed with the money laundering charges. Perhaps the government just wants to keep bitcoin not legally defined as currency, i don't know.

Bitcoin is a commodity, sure. But it's definitely not trading cards. It has much more potential than trading cards, and it's not a collectible. It's much more liquid and easy to trade across the globe. No way a trading card can serve what bitcoin is doing right now.

Japan already said that bitcoin is a legal currency, when will USA say that?