I'm guessing that if a trade goes wrong at the moment (in any jurisdiction) and somebody effectively 'steals' your bitcoins, no jurisdiction recognises bitcoins as being money, and thus no legal system will consider you to have made a financial loss and they won't get involved.
Why would it matter that what was stolen isn't money? If I trade my motorcycle to Bill for his car, and he finds a way to defraud me (fake title or something of the like), you honestly think the court says "oh, well, since no money was involved, there was no theft"? That's not how the legal system works.
It doesn't matter whether what is stolen is money or not. What matters is that you have been defrauded of something that has legally recognised, financial value, in your example, your motorcycle.
The point I was trying to make is that fiat money is legally recognised as having financial value but bitcoins (probably?) are not recognised as such so if somebody steals your bitcoins it is not at all clear to a court of law that that you have suffered any sort of financial loss that they could try to sort out on your behalf.
Gold is not legal tender, but has value.
Shares are not legal tender, but have value.
Land titles are not legal tender, but have value.
And so on.