Bitcoin: A First Legal Analysis

With Reference to German and US-American Law
  • Franziska Boehm
  • Paulina PeschEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8438)


The use of Bitcoins is increasing rapidly. Bitcoins are utilized in e-commerce to purchase both legal and illegal goods, they are transferred and traded and companies have invested their capital in the new digital currency. While the technical aspects of the system are well established, the legal framework remains unclear. Legislators all over the world are just starting to discover this new virtual phenomenon. This article illustrates selected legal challenges arising in different fields of law (public, criminal and civil law). Particular attention is paid to the German situation while the US-American context is also considered.


Money Laundering German Banking Virtual Currency Digital Currency Virtual Item 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Popper, N.: Virtual Money Draws Notice of Regulators (2013).
  2. 2.
    Foley, S.: New Yorks Finance Regulator Voices Backing for Bitcoins. Financial Times (2014).
  3. 3.
    BaFin: Hinweise zur Erlaubnispflicht nach § 32 Abs. 1 KWG, p. 1 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Examples are: VG Frankfurt of 7.5.2004 – Az. 9 G 6496/03, and of 11.10.2004 – Az. 9 E 993/04 (V), and VGH Kassel of 21.1.2005 – Az. 6 TG 1568/04, and VG Frankfurt of 5.7.2007 – Az. 1 E 4355/06 (V)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grinberg, R.: Bitcoin: an innovative alternative digital currency. Hastings Sci. Technol. Law J. 4:1, 182 et seq (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Popper, N.: Regulators See Value in Bitcoin and Investors Hasten to Agree (2013).
  7. 7.
    Raskin, M.: U.S. Agencies to Say Bitcoins Offer Legitimate Benefits (2013).
  8. 8.
    Fuller, C.: New York Bitcoin License? State Department of Financial Services Seeks Possible Regulation (2014).
  9. 9.
    Jeffries, A.: New York Considers Creating a ‘BitLicense’ for Bitcoin Businesses (2014).
  10. 10.
    Guidance FIN-2013-G001 About the Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Persons Administering, Exchanging, or Using Virtual Currencies (2013).
  11. 11.
    Santori, M.: Bitcoin Law: What US Businesses Need to Know (2013).
  12. 12.
    Santori, M.: Bitcoin Law: Money Transmission on the State Level in the US (2013).
  13. 13.
    Fischer, R.: In: Boos, K.-H., Fischer, R., Schulte-Mattler, H. (eds.) Kreditwesengesetz (§ 32, para 17), 4th edn (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bal, A.: Stateless virtual money in the tax system. Eur. Tax. 53(7), 351–356 (in particular 355) (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Isom, J.: As Certain as Death and Taxes: Consumer Considerations of Bitcoin Transactions for When the IRS Comes Knocking, p. 9 et seq (2013). SSRN: or
  16. 16.
    Rubin, R., Dougherty, C.: Bitcoin Is Property, Not Currency, in Tax System: IRS (2014).
  17. 17.
    Thompson, I.: Cryptolocker Infects Cop PC: Massachusetts Plod Fork Out Bitcoin Ransom (2013).
  18. 18.
    Meusers, R.: Erpressersoftware: US-Polizisten zahlen Online-Kriminellen Bitcoin als Lösegeld (2013).
  19. 19.
    Kremp, M.: Rasanter Kursanstieg: Erpresser senken Bitcoin-Lösegeldforderung (2013).
  20. 20.
    Kindhäuser, U.: In: Kindhäuser, U., Neumann, U., Paeffgen, H.-U. (eds.) Strafgesetzbuch (§ 263, para 250), 4th edn (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    FBI, Bitcoin Virtual Currency: Unique Features Present Distinct Challenges for Deterring Illicit Activity, 24 April 2012Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Garland, E.: Cyprus Bailout Sends Bitcoin to More Heights (2013).
  23. 23.
    BBC News Magazine: A Point of View: Bitcoin’s Freedom Promise (2013).
  24. 24.
    Ruhmannseder, F.: In: Beck’scher Online-Kommentar, B. StGB (para 8), 23rd edn (2013)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kühl, K.: In: Lackner, K., Kühl, K. (eds.) StGB (§ 261, para 3), 27th edn (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mesiano-Crookston, J.: The Legal Status of Virtual Goods (2013).
  27. 27.
    Shen, L.: Who Owns the Virtual Items? (2010).
  28. 28.
    Lemos, R. Cyber-Criminals Putting Botnets to Work on Bitcoin Mining.
  29. 29.
    Roos, P., Schumacher, P.: Rechtliche Betrachtung von Desinfektionsmaßnahmen zur Botnetzbekämpfung durch Internet-Service-Provider. In: Informationssicherheit stärken – Vertrauen in die Zukunft schaffen, Tagungsband zum 13. Deutschen IT-Sicherheitskongress, pp. 37–53. SecuMedia (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fischer, T.: In: Beck‘scher Kurzkommentar, Strafgesetzbuch und Nebengesetze (§ 242, para 3), 57th edn (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    One of the few cases in this context: AG Augsburg of 30 November 2010, Az. 33 Ds 603 Js 120422/09 jugGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Feldmann, E.: Netherlands Teen Sentenced for Stealing Virtual Goods (2008).
  33. 33.
    Tucows.Com Co. v Lojas Renner S.A. [2011] O.J. No. 3576 for domain namesGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Guly, C.: Domain Names are ‘Property’: Ont. CA (2011).
  35. 35.
    Wiebe, A.: In: Wiebe, A. (ed.) Wettbewerbs- und Immaterialgüterrecht, p. 18 (2010)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Magnus, U.: In: von Staudinger, J. (ed.) BGB (Art. 1, para 42). CISG (2013)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Eckert, K.-P.: Steuerliche Betrachtung elektronischer Zahlungsmittel am Beispiel sog. Bitcoin-Geschäfte. In: Der Betrieb (DB) 2013, 2108 et seq. in the context of income taxGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gehrlein, M.: In: Bamberger, H.G., Roth, H. (eds.) Beck’scher Online-Kommentar zum BGB (§ 480, para 1) (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mader, P.: In: von Staudinger, J. (ed.) BGB, Buch 2 (§ 480, para 7), 15th edn (2014)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Westermann, H.P.: In: Münchener Kommentar zum BGB (§ 480, para 1) (2012)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kaplanov, N.M.: Nerdy Money: Bitcoin, The Private Digital Currency, and the Case Against Its Regulation, 140, 25 Loy. Consumer L. Rev. 111 (2012)Google Scholar
  42. 42.

Copyright information

© IFCA/Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Information, Telecommunication, and Media LawUniversity of MünsterMünsterGermany

Personalised recommendations