My favourite of the comments in the thread has got to be "The state doesn't define Bitcoin and neither does a private company that is a basic fact of the techno

My favourite of the comments in the thread has got to be "The state doesn't define Bitcoin and neither does a private company that is a basic fact of the technology, my node does.", as an explanation of why Bitcoin doesn't count as an investment regardless of what the law says. I would be really interested in what the IRS and the legal department of the company mentioned in OP think of this novel theory about the origins of law. My personal inclination is that they would have about as much respect for it as your average judge has for sovereign citizen theories of law.