Thanks for the clarification. I know early on in bitcoin's story there were people concerned that a bad actor could post some child porn into the blockchain, leaving anyone who used bitcoin from that point on open to charges of distributing it.
Happily that doesn't appear to have eventuated.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Ultimately, I think while the rules of 'law' might be able to be interpreted to generate a prosecution for large numbers of users of a network just on a tenuous connection such as you suggested - in reality, there will probably be some 'common sense' used and a recognition that the intentions of those running the network is not to break those rules and that they have just gotten caught up in it all by offering a public service. I also think that despite claims to the contrary, Bitcoin is more traceable than the average distributor of criminalised material would be comfortable with.