The problem is - they have to define it very specifically and that's not an easy thing to do. I can see lawyers and judges already hating us for bringing Bitcoin upon them

I have a hard time envisioning a precise legal definition of crypto-currencies that would not interfere with some other basic rights or technologies (like cryptography or distributed databases). The thing is, that many of Bitcoin's technicalities could easily be changed if there was a great incentive to do so (how coins are issued, where the blockchain is stored, how transactions are processed, etc.).

It will probably be a looong time before jurisdictions really catch up with technologies like Bitcoin...