I hope that deed is being recorded with the county as well. Also I wonder if the deed is voidable since the consideration isnt legally defined. I wouldn't insure that title.
Is ethereum defined as something that has value? Has that been tested in court? I dunno but I wouldnt touch that shit without a clear authorization of my underwriter.How is the consideration not legally defined?
Is ethereum defined as something that has value? Has that been tested in court? I dunno but I wouldnt touch that shit without a clear authorization of my underwriter.
Well I am assuming the contract specified a purchase price in dollars and not X etherium coins. Anyway I am talking about what would appear on the deed. If the value of the valuable consideration can be questioned, there is a risk of a voidable deed.Nothing is "defined" as something that has value. Dollars don't have intrinsic value. You put the consideration in the contract, whether that consideration be ten stacks of zimbabwean dollars or twelve camels or a five foot pile of shaven dick hairs. It really doesn't matter that the consideration has X or Y value in the real world, just that that was the consideration bargained for.
Well I am assuming the contract specified a purchase price in dollars and not X etherium coins. Anyway I am talking about what would appear on the deed. If the value of the valuable consideration can be questioned, there is a risk of a voidable deed.
And if it goes to zero tomorrow and the seller decides to challenge the deed? Will he win in court? Probably not. Is the title now not clear for a long time? Seems like it. Why allow for a possibility of such a thing.With Ethereum having an easily defined value in dollars or any other currency in the world on about 10 different exchanges how can you even approach this argument with "ethereum has no value" credibly?
And if it goes to zero tomorrow and the seller decides to challenge the deed? Will he win in court? Probably not. Is the title now not clear for a long time? Seems like it. Why allow for a possibility of such a thing.
This particular commodity is not like the others don't you think? Also have there been cases establishing an existence of value of crypto? Other commoditys have had those.So you think it's a credible problem that the value of a commodity that you used for consideration could drop tomorrow (assuming closing is today) and that'd be a basis to challenge the deed?
Thats very interesting. Do you have even one case of this happening with any other commodity?
This particular commodity is not like the others don't you think? Also have there been cases establishing an existence of value of crypto? Other commoditys have had those.
You are being dense. I am not talking about nuclear war or rezoning which is not retroactive thus a dumb example. I can see someone trying to void a deed based on non existence of valuable considering if the deed lists consideration as etherium. This has fuck all to do with how crypto works and everthing to do with introducing ambiguity to the deed. Why take the risk?I mean by your logic, what if tomorrow the value of the dollar tanks against gold or the euro or any other currency, and people start challenging deeds because dollars are worthless? What if the city rezones or there's nuclear war that destroys the property and makes the land useless? Etc... None of those things change the fact that at the time of the deed, both parties thought the consideration was valuable. If they didn't they wouldn't have signed the deed.
This whole line of thought by you is asinine and just FUD based on not understanding crypto or thinking it's fashionable to be against it for whatever reason.
Or what if I trade cars with someone, and a freak occurrence happens with a car that no parties knew would happen?
Does a car trade involve a document that proves your possession of the car and that document can be made void by one of the parties? No? Must not be real estate then.Or what if I trade cars with someone, and a freak occurrence happens with a car that no parties knew would happen?
You are being dense. I am not talking about nuclear war or rezoning which is not retroactive thus a dumb example. I can see someone trying to void a deed based on non existence of valuable considering if the deed lists consideration as etherium. This has fuck all to do with how crypto works and everthing to do with introducing ambiguity to the deed. Why take the risk?
It's asinine to challenge a consideration of some amount of US currency. But is it asinine to challenge crypto consideration? Maybe or maybe not. There is no precedent so why introduce the risk? So dense.You'd have to show it had no value at the time of the closing, and furthermore that the parties knew this. Courts don't inquire as the adequacy of consideration, just that there is consideration. See e.g. sell you my property for $1, perfectly legal and deed would binding.
Again, your position here is just asinine FUD.
His most egregious crime is being named Brock.Just found another reason why I think BitCoin isn't going to be a major player for much longer and why their development has gone off the rails these past few years, Board of Directors - Bitcoin Foundation
Brock Pierce was one of the founders of IGE, the dudes that sold WoW gold back in the day you know. He was in my EQ guild back in 2000, and from what I've seen since then his whole business model is to take what other people have done, exploit it so he gets rich, and move on. Plus he's most likely a pedophile.