As set forth in the landmark case of Godzilla v. Tokyo, your credit-swap derivative argument is invalid.
Invalid by what logic?
I was only being humorous. The comment was really more on the Godzilla meme than your theory. Also, have you not seen the "your argument is invalid" meme? If not, you are missing out the best part of the internet:
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/your-argument-is-invalidBoth Solex and I were being flippant. But since you mention it, I think the point of Solex's Godzilla picture is that the statement "bitcoin is legal because it is a credit swap" is not really an accurate one. You can draw a lot of parallels between a bitcoin transaction and a credit swap, but that isn't what makes one legal. States of affairs are
prima facie legal. Certain laws, like the MSB regulations in this instance, can be a reason why an act or state of affairs is "illegal", but the contrapositive is not true.
Also, the statement "BTC is an Over the Counter Credit Swap Derivative (OCD) in the eyes of the law" is just not a coherent one. A BTC transaction may be many things under many circumstances, and fall under more than one regulatory regime. For example, FinCen, by and large, treats a bitcoin as a 'virtual currency'. The IRS treats most BTC transactions as something similar to a barter. Some people offer credit swaps denominated in bitcoin, but that doesn't make "a bitcoin" a credit swap.
Does that make sense?
Edit: oh, I see you ninja-edited some more into to your post.
Allow me to apologize to both of you, I am just trying to present the philosophical rebuttal to the DHS ticket-cop's write-up.
I rather fancy that most people still have little idea of what bitcoin is, or the truly monumental breakthrough it represents in the science of independent human resource exchange-valuation transmission. It is a quantum leap beyond anything else that has ever been used by humans as their own Medium of Labour Resource Exchange. Though it may bark like a money and quack like a money it is most assuredly not any sort of a national socialist foreign-exchange "currency", nor is it backed by anything other than faith in our own human natures. Furthermore it cannot be seen thus cannot be construed to even appear let alone "look like"
(prima facie) anything anyone has ever used as a "money" (national-socialist trade-backed foreign-exchange currency).
It is not a genuine nor a "reserve"-counterfeited (fiat) gold or silver deposit-receipt note issued by any smithy or nation, nor is it a constitutionally valid publicly owned and operated for public profit "fiat" greenback-currency like that of Julius Caesar, Henry 1st or the Continental Congress/Lincoln/JFK. It is not a privately issued for private profit debt note to private lenders backed by ancient gold enslavement bonds possessed by a bankrupted nation in receivership's gold-Pharaoh boardroom-socialist creditors, either...
So when we look to see the true nature of the Commercial Resource instrument that it is, we see that it is a "derivative token" of a known, previous "funded credit" transaction that may potentially be exchanged for an unknown and unknowably-valued future "credit funding" transaction whereby it can change hands once more, and so on.
Therefore it is a token derivative of a past and likely future Credit Swap, that may be had in a marketplace or over a counter, to use as an alternative to/from conducting a legal tender transaction.
That does not make it either a "currency" or a "money" unless one chooses to redeem it for one, (by selling it to another "credit funder") and then apply that funder's currency to the transaction conducted.