I just described this case that way earlier today, before even reading this thread.  I reminded someone that many people demonized the Internet as a place that would enable gambling and child porn.  This debate rose to the US congress in the late 90s. 

Similarly, the VCR was supposed to be a tool for copyright infringement.  The result of this case is what helped to raise awareness of our fair use rights, only to be marginalized and regulated via the DMCA later on. 

The bigger problem, however, is that the money laundering laws created in the 80s to target "drug kingpins" were a time bomb waiting to go off as they gradually ensnared more and more innocent people who have no interest in drugs or profiting from them in any way.  Take the $10k limit established back then.  Is $10k in the 80s the same as $10k 30 years later?  Inflation ensures that more and more people are impacted every year -- until cash and privacy are eliminated for all citizens. 

Now comes bitcoin.  It is getting double wacked as both a new technology, and at a time when the dragnet of the money laundering laws has increased so wide that the % of people being targeted that most of us would consider "good people" is increasing rapidly.  In fact, triple wacked because bitcoins leaves out the central banks, which have been the most outspoken opponents of it.  Quadruple wacked when you consider how governments have increasing used central banks for political means by printing money to buy votes (the primary cause of the high inflation rate in Argentina). 

Hopefully these cases raise awareness not only for the benefit of bitcoin, but also to help push back some of our laws so that good people are not ensnared in them.  What good is a war on drugs when the end result is a war on people who don't use illegal drugs, people who support the real efforts that arrest real international drug traffickers to stop the drug trades themselves for cocaine, heroin, etc,..., but are people who use currencies, people who buy pizzas, people who pay rent/mortgage.