I've had a question that I"m curious to hear the community's reaction on: Doesn't the FBI wanting to seize the bitcoins do more to legitimize the currency than anything thus far? Isn't it tantamount to saying "Yes, this is like dollars, francs, or another legitimate currency that we need to seize."
I'm wondering if that conversation has come up among management at FBI and what the outcome has been.
It's like any other asset with a market value. Collectible baseball cards have no inherent value to me (I'm not a baseball fan), they're just (mildly aesthetically attractive) pieces of paper. In that sense, they are similar to Bitcoin. That some people will pay several million dollars for them does not change that fact.
If a drug dealer settled all his transaction in baseball cards, the FBI would of course confiscate them.
It definitely wouldn't if it was $80 m in cocaine; the FBI would confiscate it and have to hand it over to the DEA to have it destroyed.
Whether or not the FBI wants to seize it and spend it in some way, or just to seize it so it can't be spent by DPR or anyone anymore is up for debate. I'm not actually sure what the laws are regarding money or possessions seized from criminals over there.
Cocaine is a different story as it is illegal in and of itself. As far as I know there is no momentum to outlaw Bitcoin itself. Other seized forms of property are routinely auctioned off at public auctions which is presumably a possibly avenue for Bitcoins as well.
That's what I thought as well. In fact, wouldn't their "cashing out" the Bitcoins be tantamount to an endorsement of Bitcoin? They're injecting money into the ecosystem and directly helping to circulate it.
That they are even trying to exchange the Bitcoins for USD is, at least in my mind, U.S. governmental approval of Bitcoins.
I'm wondering if that conversation has come up among management at FBI and what the outcome has been.