Now that the IRS has deemed bitcoin to be "property" and not "currency" surely that means that charlie shrem's & Ross Ulbricht's money laundering allegations are no longer valid?
The big point that must be decided in the law is whether bitcoin is property or currency when it comes to
Nemo dat quod non habet, where stolen bitcoin could be reclaimed by the original owner even though it has gone through several
bona fide owners, if it is considered property.
Could you explain this further? How would people even prove that the ownership belonged to them, besides the coins going through their wallet in the blockchain?