3 ms·
plot twist: hollywood can only claim damages on loss of revenue where, as usual, they'd start with 100% of "streams" == purchase * price == lost revenue, and t
by PaywallBuster 3y ago
plot twist:
hollywood can only claim damages on loss of revenue where, as usual, they'd start with 100% of "streams" == purchase * price == lost revenue, and then probably work down to a more reasonable assumption
if they simply put all the money they got from the website into crypto, and years later it's worth 2B, it does not belong to Hollywood or even the german governemnt
ofc between hollywood and tax department taking their cut there's still plenty left
- Freeboots 3y agoIsn't that basically what happened with mtgox? Karpeles ended up on the hook for a dollar amount far less than the (then current) value of the crypto lost.
- bhaak 3y ago> if they simply put all the money they got from the website into crypto, and years later it's worth 2B, it does not belong to Hollywood or even the german government Really? After money laundering the state can't take away the laundered money? I highly doubt that this is how it works.
- dark-star 3y agoIt's not 2B that the german government gets. It is 50k bitcoin. If the price (value) of bitcoin has increased in the last few years, that's nice but does not really matter. The price could as easily have dropped. If you reeplace bitcoin by "famous painting" or "lucery sports car" it might make more sense
- PaywallBuster 3y ago> They are said to have purchased Bitcoins with the proceeds Based on this, I'd assume the illegal proceeds are fiat currency based, hence they could sell the full bitcoin amount, return _all_ illegal profits, fines,etc and still have plenty left Likewise, if they bought crypto/stocks/business but the valuation went down, they'd be liable to pay the "illegal proceeds" amount, not the value of the business which may have declined significantly in the meantime?