Taurus on Nostr: A pseudonymous plaintiff called Noah Doe filed in New York to claim 39,069 dormant ...
A pseudonymous plaintiff called Noah Doe filed in New York to claim 39,069 dormant Bitcoin addresses. The list includes wallets linked to Satoshi. Combined stack, roughly 3.7 million BTC, about $37 billion at current prices. Theory, NY abandoned property law, claim as finders.
The Bitcoin Policy Institute filed motion to intervene as a defendant the same week, arguing the case is both legally and technically flawed. Their framing lands at the seam nobody talks about. Bitcoin's property rights are settled at the cryptography layer. Civil law's finder doctrine is the seam where unmoved satoshis become legally claimable by outsiders.
The precedent risk is structural. Once a single state rules unmoved Bitcoin can be claimed by finders, the ruling travels. Every cold wallet, every estate plan, every accidental loss, every deliberately hold as a store of value holder is now contestable by squatters with standing doctrine. The "your keys, your coins" ethos sits on one side of a cord that civil law has barely touched.
Galaxy analysis underpinning BPI's motion shows extensive overlap between the plaintiff's target addresses, the 2025 dusting campaign, and wallets previously claimed by Craig Wright. The bridge being built here is a Wright connection doctrine.
What stops the precedent before it sets?
Published at
2026-07-12 01:25:28 UTCEvent JSON
{
"id": "b66d292647a80a8ef6b9fad880cb9e74eeebd8b8407dc10b745da99f20a2e689",
"pubkey": "9c53485849518fa429cca814ba10eea9599bdf4e183d8202c53bb4b719427d3c",
"created_at": 1783819528,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"imeta",
"url https://blossom.primal.net/c9b055e6e75ae8859f7eb3ddd1d3be55f6e634f9790814aee50b6772b4db5570.png",
"m png",
"dim 1280.0x720.0"
],
[
"client",
"Primal iOS"
]
],
"content": "A pseudonymous plaintiff called Noah Doe filed in New York to claim 39,069 dormant Bitcoin addresses. The list includes wallets linked to Satoshi. Combined stack, roughly 3.7 million BTC, about $37 billion at current prices. Theory, NY abandoned property law, claim as finders.\n\nThe Bitcoin Policy Institute filed motion to intervene as a defendant the same week, arguing the case is both legally and technically flawed. Their framing lands at the seam nobody talks about. Bitcoin's property rights are settled at the cryptography layer. Civil law's finder doctrine is the seam where unmoved satoshis become legally claimable by outsiders.\n\nThe precedent risk is structural. Once a single state rules unmoved Bitcoin can be claimed by finders, the ruling travels. Every cold wallet, every estate plan, every accidental loss, every deliberately hold as a store of value holder is now contestable by squatters with standing doctrine. The \"your keys, your coins\" ethos sits on one side of a cord that civil law has barely touched.\n\nGalaxy analysis underpinning BPI's motion shows extensive overlap between the plaintiff's target addresses, the 2025 dusting campaign, and wallets previously claimed by Craig Wright. The bridge being built here is a Wright connection doctrine.\n\nWhat stops the precedent before it sets?\nhttps://blossom.primal.net/c9b055e6e75ae8859f7eb3ddd1d3be55f6e634f9790814aee50b6772b4db5570.png",
"sig": "c0e8eebe736fb9660703edd0d55ba07945a4eecc784d6fd812f3fb962a278b95da1981d5266321f8bc44fe766697b1aec702d7fc53cb68b833b945c7054e0000"
}
