#uniform commercial code

[imaddressingyou]

Sovereign citizen sighting out in the wild.

Whole lot of crazy people out there.

[legitt-ai]

Navigating the Uniform Commercial Code: A Comprehensive Guide to UCC and Contract Law

Understanding the Uniform Commercial Code is indispensable for anyone engaged in commercial dealings, as it profoundly influences how contra

[devinkoblas]

UCC Filing: What is it All About?

Maintaining a satisfactory business credit report is one of the most crucial aspects of running a small business. With a good credit history, companies can qualify for comprehensive loans, better loan terms, attract investors, and most importantly, grow.

[academicmasters]

Uniform Commercial Code

Your boss has asked you to provide a draft of the final contract that will become the document guiding the companies in the fulfilling the requirements you have presented in the previous weeks. You are to provide a white paper that includes the following:

An introduction discussing what topics will be discussed and an explanation of the purpose for administering a contract.

A statement of…

View On WordPress

[blastingzombies]

American Law Students I need your help!! If you have access to legal databases I desperately need articles on § 2-403. Power to Transfer; Good Faith Purchase of Goods; "Entrusting". I am doing a comparative analysis on Sale Under a Voidable Title for my dissertation and I have a very limited supply of American articles. I would be forever in your debt if you could dropbox/email etc. me some even if you don’t think they’re relevant!!

[tnelms]

At cryptocurrency and fintech conferences, FT Alphaville often hears Bitcoin enthusiasts make the assertion that Bitcoin is superior to fiat currency because it eliminates debt from the monetary system. But this, of course, is a fallacy.Bitcoin may have the potential to create a fully-funded reserve system, but it certainly doesn't eliminate debt from any system. At best, Bitcoin's public ledger records a transfer of digital access rights in the eyes of the clearing network. It does not, however, record or see the terms and conditions of that transfer.

And those conditions are, of course, always social and political. But this also has strictly legal implications as well: If the conditions through which a particular Bitcoin or Bitcoin subunit is acquired are unlawful, then under existing legal regimes, that Bitcoin can be rightfully claimed by its original owner, even if it has been subsequently passed on in lawful transactions.

George K Fogg at law firm Perkins Coie has been thinking about the problem of past claims (or liens) on bitcoins for nearly 14 months now.

His conclusion: under the United States’ UCC code (uniform commercial code) as long as bitcoins are treated as general intangibles, no high value investor can be sure that an angry Tony Soprano won’t show up one day to claim that the bitcoins they thought they received in a completely unencumbered manner are actually his. In fact, it’s only if and when Tony Soprano publicly renounces his claim to the underlying bitcoin collateral he is owed that the bitcoins stand a chance of being treated as unencumbered. Until then, a hot potato claim risk exists for every future acquirer of Soprano’s bitcoin.

Indeed, given the high volume of fraud and default in the bitcoin network, chances are most bitcoins have competing claims over them by now. Put another way, there are probably more people with legitimate claims over bitcoins than there are bitcoins.

In fact, because the blockchain enables the transparent tracing of single units from one party to another, Kaminska (one of the best writing on Bitcoin out there, imo) suggests that Bitcoin may in fact “empower” such preceding property claims!

This legal work all goes back to the UCC, which also governs cash transfers, and cash transfers are different: They are perfectly negotiable instruments. Thus:

In the eyes of the UCC code, cash doesn’t take its claim history with it upon transfer. To the contrary, anyone who acquires cash starts off with a clean slate as far as previous claims are concerned.

Kaminska goes on to document the only way, according to Fogg, that would legally protect current holders of Bitcoin from the claims of previous owners who were unlawfully separated from their Bitcoin: to keep the Bitcoin with a licensed custodians or brokers. This is an adaptation of the practice of depositing stock certificates with the Depository Trust Company in the early 20th century.

Here’s how Fogg puts it to Kaminska:

My libertarian friends have a belief they have created something that is outside of any statutory governance, and my response is you have created something novel that can help in transferring value across borders but you can’t pretend that the UCC doesn’t exist and because it does exist it affects bitcoin. Bitcoin is governed by the UCC. You can be an ostrich and pretend that it’s not covered by it, or you can address that it is in fact covered by the statute and find a way to solve the problem.

Read more at the link above, or check out Fogg’s article on Coindesk.

[hugahalf-elf]

"I won't you test on fixtures. There's is a limit to how cruel even I can get." - UCC Prof well, that's good to know.